AMZA vs. CGDV

Last updated Jun 14, 2026

AMZA (InfraCap MLP ETF) and CGDV (Capital Group Dividend Value ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - AMZA is a MLPs fund actively managed by Virtus Investment Partners, while CGDV is a Large Cap Value Equities fund actively managed by Capital Group. Both are actively managed. Over the past 3 years, AMZA returned 22.25%/yr vs 24.15%/yr for CGDV. At a 0.44 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. AMZA charges 2.01%/yr vs 0.33%/yr for CGDV.

Performance

AMZA vs. CGDV - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in InfraCap MLP ETF (AMZA) and Capital Group Dividend Value ETF (CGDV). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, AMZA achieves a 21.82% return, which is significantly higher than CGDV's 11.55% return.

AMZA

• 1D: 0.59%
• 1M: -3.43%
• YTD: 21.82%
• 6M: 21.02%
• 1Y: 15.58%
• 3Y*: 22.25%
• 5Y*: 17.67%
• 10Y*: 5.17%

CGDV

• 1D: 0.66%
• 1M: 1.53%
• YTD: 11.55%
• 6M: 12.50%
• 1Y: 28.33%
• 3Y*: 24.15%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

AMZA vs. CGDV - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
AMZA InfraCap MLP ETF	21.82%	0.17%	30.90%	23.35%	17.91%
CGDV Capital Group Dividend Value ETF	11.55%	25.50%	20.10%	28.81%	-0.44%

Correlation

The correlation between AMZA and CGDV is 0.07, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.07
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.31
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 24, 2022	0.44

Over the past year, the correlation between AMZA and CGDV has dropped to 0.07 - well below their long-term average of 0.44, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

AMZA vs. CGDV - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	AMZA	CGDV
Energy	99.8%	3.8%
Utilities	0.2%	2.1%
Basic Materials	-	2.9%
Communication Services	-	8.4%
Consumer Cyclical	-	10.6%
Consumer Defensive	-	5.5%
Financial Services	-	6.8%
Healthcare	-	11.5%
Industrials	-	13.2%
Real Estate	-	1.1%
Technology	-	34.1%

Return for Risk

AMZA vs. CGDV — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

AMZA

AMZA Risk / Return Rank: 28
AMZA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 28
AMZA Sortino Ratio Rank: 27
AMZA Omega Ratio Rank: 26
AMZA Calmar Ratio Rank: 30
AMZA Martin Ratio Rank: 27

CGDV

CGDV Risk / Return Rank: 78
CGDV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 82
CGDV Sortino Ratio Rank: 81
CGDV Omega Ratio Rank: 82
CGDV Calmar Ratio Rank: 65
CGDV Martin Ratio Rank: 79

The rank (0–100) shows how this investment's returns compare to the risk taken. Higher = better. Based on the past 12 months of data, combining Sharpe, Sortino, and other metrics used by quantitative funds and institutional investors.

AMZA vs. CGDV - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for InfraCap MLP ETF (AMZA) and Capital Group Dividend Value ETF (CGDV). 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.

Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.

	AMZA	CGDV	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.89	2.27	-1.38
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.33	3.11	-1.78
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.16	1.42	-0.27
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.30	2.83	-1.53
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	3.23	13.19	-9.96

AMZA vs. CGDV - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current AMZA Sharpe Ratio is 0.89, which is lower than the CGDV Sharpe Ratio of 2.27. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of AMZA and CGDV, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

AMZA vs. CGDV - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum AMZA drawdown since its inception was -91.46%, which is greater than CGDV's maximum drawdown of -21.82%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for AMZA and CGDV.

Drawdown Indicators

	AMZA	CGDV	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-91.46%	-21.82%	-69.64%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-12.16%	-9.75%	-2.41%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-18.56%	-14.28%	-4.28%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-25.15%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-86.84%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-10.48%	-0.98%	-9.50%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-44.92%	-3.60%	-41.32%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.87%	2.09%	+2.78%

Volatility

AMZA vs. CGDV - Volatility Comparison

InfraCap MLP ETF (AMZA) has a higher volatility of 5.43% compared to Capital Group Dividend Value ETF (CGDV) at 4.52%. This indicates that AMZA's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CGDV based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	AMZA	CGDV	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.43%	4.52%	+0.91%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	13.60%	9.80%	+3.80%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	17.72%	12.13%	+5.59%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	25.84%	15.57%	+10.27%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	37.21%	15.57%	+21.64%

AMZA vs. CGDV - Expense Ratio Comparison

AMZA has a 2.01% expense ratio, which is higher than CGDV's 0.33% expense ratio.

Dividends

AMZA vs. CGDV - Dividend Comparison

AMZA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 8.05%, more than CGDV's 1.17% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
AMZA InfraCap MLP ETF	8.05%	8.81%	7.29%	9.40%	7.65%	10.24%	22.13%	19.47%	34.46%	24.16%	18.36%	18.21%
CGDV Capital Group Dividend Value ETF	1.17%	1.29%	1.60%	1.65%	1.36%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both AMZA and CGDV in my portfolio?

AMZA and CGDV have a correlation of 0.07, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, AMZA or CGDV?

AMZA has higher volatility (5.43%) compared to CGDV (4.52%). In terms of maximum drawdown, AMZA dropped -91.46% vs CGDV's -21.82%.

Which ETF is better, AMZA or CGDV?

On 3-year performance, CGDV leads with 24.15% vs 22.25% for AMZA. On fees, CGDV is cheaper at 0.33% per year. On volatility, CGDV has been the lower-risk option at 4.52%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, AMZA or CGDV?

Over the 3-year period, CGDV has performed better with a 24.15% return vs 22.25%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, AMZA or CGDV?

CGDV is cheaper with a 0.33% expense ratio, compared with 2.01% for AMZA.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, AMZA or CGDV?

AMZA has the higher dividend yield at 8.05%, compared with 1.17% for CGDV.

What is the main difference between AMZA and CGDV?

AMZA is categorized as MLPs, while CGDV is Large Cap Value Equities. They also come from different issuers: Virtus Investment Partners and Capital Group. Their fees differ too: 2.01% for AMZA and 0.33% for CGDV.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

CGDV currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.27 vs 0.89), 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.