AINP vs. CGMS
AINP (Allspring Income Plus ETF) and CGMS (Capital Group U.S. Multi-Sector Income ETF) are both Multisector Bonds funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, AINP returned 6.72% vs 7.45% for CGMS. A 0.76 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. AINP charges 0.36%/yr vs 0.39%/yr for CGMS.
Performance
AINP vs. CGMS - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, AINP achieves a 1.33% return, which is significantly lower than CGMS's 1.80% return.
AINP
- 1D
- 0.00%
- 1M
- 0.70%
- YTD
- 1.33%
- 6M
- 1.86%
- 1Y
- 6.72%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
CGMS
- 1D
- 0.04%
- 1M
- 0.52%
- YTD
- 1.80%
- 6M
- 2.08%
- 1Y
- 7.45%
- 3Y*
- 8.01%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
AINP vs. CGMS - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | |
|---|---|---|---|
AINP Allspring Income Plus ETF | 1.33% | 7.53% | -1.24% |
CGMS Capital Group U.S. Multi-Sector Income ETF | 1.80% | 7.52% | -0.78% |
Correlation
The correlation between AINP and CGMS is 0.80, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.80 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 6, 2024 | 0.76 |
The correlation between AINP and CGMS has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.76 to 0.80 - a consistent structural relationship.
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
Return for Risk
AINP vs. CGMS — Risk / Return Rank
AINP
CGMS
AINP vs. CGMS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Allspring Income Plus ETF (AINP) and Capital Group U.S. Multi-Sector Income ETF (CGMS). Risk-adjusted metrics are performance indicators that assess an investment's returns in relation to its risk, enabling a more accurate comparison of different investment options.
| AINP | CGMS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | 2.07 | 2.19 | -0.11 |
Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | 3.15 | 3.31 | -0.16 |
Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.41 | 1.42 | -0.01 |
Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.64 | 2.93 | -0.29 |
Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 10.86 | 13.15 | -2.28 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| AINP | CGMS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.07 | 2.19 | -0.11 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 1.41 | 1.68 | -0.27 |
Drawdowns
AINP vs. CGMS - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum AINP drawdown since its inception was -2.61%, smaller than the maximum CGMS drawdown of -4.08%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for AINP and CGMS.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| AINP | CGMS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -2.61% | -4.08% | +1.47% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -2.51% | -2.47% | -0.04% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -4.08% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -0.47% | -0.67% | +0.20% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 0.61% | 0.55% | +0.06% |
Volatility
AINP vs. CGMS - Volatility Comparison
Allspring Income Plus ETF (AINP) and Capital Group U.S. Multi-Sector Income ETF (CGMS) have volatilities of 1.15% and 1.16%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| AINP | CGMS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 1.15% | 1.16% | -0.01% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 2.45% | 2.65% | -0.20% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 3.26% | 3.43% | -0.17% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 3.63% | 5.13% | -1.50% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 3.63% | 5.13% | -1.50% |
AINP vs. CGMS - Expense Ratio Comparison
AINP has a 0.36% expense ratio, which is lower than CGMS's 0.39% expense ratio.
Dividends
AINP vs. CGMS - Dividend Comparison
AINP's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.77%, less than CGMS's 6.08% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
AINP Allspring Income Plus ETF | 5.77% | 5.03% | 0.47% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
CGMS Capital Group U.S. Multi-Sector Income ETF | 6.08% | 6.00% | 5.91% | 5.84% | 0.97% |
Frequently Asked Questions
AINP and CGMS have a correlation of 0.80, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
CGMS has higher volatility (1.16%) compared to AINP (1.15%). In terms of maximum drawdown, AINP dropped -2.61% vs CGMS's -4.08%.
On 1-year performance, CGMS leads with 7.45% vs 6.72% for AINP. On fees, AINP is cheaper at 0.36% per year. Their volatility is very similar. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, CGMS has performed better with a 7.45% return vs 6.72%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
AINP is cheaper with a 0.36% expense ratio, compared with 0.39% for CGMS.
CGMS has the higher dividend yield at 6.08%, compared with 5.77% for AINP.
They also come from different issuers: Allspring and Capital Group. Their fees differ too: 0.36% for AINP and 0.39% for CGMS.
CGMS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.19 vs 2.07), meaning it's delivered slightly more return per unit of risk over the trailing 12 months. However, this ranking shifts over time - use the Risk/Return Score above for a more comprehensive view that combines Sharpe, Sortino, and other measures used by quantitative funds.
Find the right allocation for AINP and CGMS
Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.
Open Portfolio Optimizer