BIZD vs. CGDV

Last updated Jun 14, 2026

BIZD (VanEck BDC Income ETF) and CGDV (Capital Group Dividend Value ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - BIZD is a Financials Equities fund tracking the MVIS US Business Development Companies Index, while CGDV is a Large Cap Value Equities fund actively managed by Capital Group. BIZD is passively managed, while CGDV is actively managed. Over the past 3 years, BIZD returned 5.47%/yr vs 24.15%/yr for CGDV. A 0.61 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. BIZD charges 12.86%/yr vs 0.33%/yr for CGDV.

Performance

BIZD vs. CGDV - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in VanEck BDC Income ETF (BIZD) 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, BIZD achieves a -6.86% return, which is significantly lower than CGDV's 11.55% return.

BIZD

• 1D: 0.71%
• 1M: 0.79%
• YTD: -6.86%
• 6M: -8.47%
• 1Y: -11.02%
• 3Y*: 5.47%
• 5Y*: 4.25%
• 10Y*: 8.13%

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)

BIZD vs. CGDV - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
BIZD VanEck BDC Income ETF	-6.86%	-4.96%	15.63%	27.02%	-8.67%
CGDV Capital Group Dividend Value ETF	11.55%	25.50%	20.10%	28.81%	-0.44%

Correlation

The correlation between BIZD and CGDV is 0.47, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.48
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.53
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 24, 2022	0.61

The correlation between BIZD and CGDV shifts across timeframes, from 0.47 (1 year) to 0.61 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

BIZD vs. CGDV - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	BIZD	CGDV
Financial Services	100.0%	6.8%
Basic Materials	-	2.9%
Communication Services	-	8.4%
Consumer Cyclical	-	10.6%
Consumer Defensive	-	5.5%
Energy	-	3.8%
Healthcare	-	11.5%
Industrials	-	13.2%
Real Estate	-	1.1%
Technology	-	34.1%
Utilities	-	2.1%

Return for Risk

BIZD vs. CGDV — Risk / Return Rank

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

BIZD

BIZD Risk / Return Rank: 5
BIZD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4
BIZD Sortino Ratio Rank: 4
BIZD Omega Ratio Rank: 4
BIZD Calmar Ratio Rank: 5
BIZD Martin Ratio Rank: 5

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.

BIZD vs. CGDV - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for VanEck BDC Income ETF (BIZD) 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.

	BIZD	CGDV	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.64	2.27	-2.91
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-0.82	3.11	-3.93
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.91	1.42	-0.51
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.53	2.83	-3.36
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-0.91	13.19	-14.09

BIZD vs. CGDV - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BIZD Sharpe Ratio is -0.64, which is lower than the CGDV Sharpe Ratio of 2.27. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BIZD 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

BIZD vs. CGDV - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BIZD drawdown since its inception was -55.44%, which is greater than CGDV's maximum drawdown of -21.82%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BIZD and CGDV.

Drawdown Indicators

	BIZD	CGDV	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-55.44%	-21.82%	-33.62%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-22.22%	-9.75%	-12.47%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-22.56%	-14.28%	-8.28%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-22.91%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-55.44%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-17.39%	-0.98%	-16.41%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-6.74%	-3.60%	-3.14%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	12.97%	2.09%	+10.88%

Volatility

BIZD vs. CGDV - Volatility Comparison

VanEck BDC Income ETF (BIZD) has a higher volatility of 4.92% compared to Capital Group Dividend Value ETF (CGDV) at 4.52%. This indicates that BIZD'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

	BIZD	CGDV	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.92%	4.52%	+0.40%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	14.97%	9.80%	+5.17%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	18.32%	12.13%	+6.19%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	17.44%	15.57%	+1.87%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	21.75%	15.57%	+6.18%

BIZD vs. CGDV - Expense Ratio Comparison

BIZD has a 12.86% expense ratio, which is higher than CGDV's 0.33% expense ratio.

Dividends

BIZD vs. CGDV - Dividend Comparison

BIZD's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 13.56%, more than CGDV's 1.17% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
BIZD VanEck BDC Income ETF	13.56%	11.78%	10.94%	10.96%	11.21%	8.14%	10.39%	9.13%	10.88%	9.13%	8.51%	9.12%
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 BIZD and CGDV in my portfolio?

BIZD and CGDV have a correlation of 0.47, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, BIZD or CGDV?

BIZD has higher volatility (4.92%) compared to CGDV (4.52%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BIZD dropped -55.44% vs CGDV's -21.82%.

Which ETF is better, BIZD or CGDV?

On 3-year performance, CGDV leads with 24.15% vs 5.47% for BIZD. 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, BIZD or CGDV?

Over the 3-year period, CGDV has performed better with a 24.15% return vs 5.47%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, BIZD or CGDV?

CGDV is cheaper with a 0.33% expense ratio, compared with 12.86% for BIZD.

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

BIZD has the higher dividend yield at 13.56%, compared with 1.17% for CGDV.

What is the main difference between BIZD and CGDV?

BIZD is categorized as Financials Equities, while CGDV is Large Cap Value Equities. They also come from different issuers: VanEck and Capital Group. Their fees differ too: 12.86% for BIZD and 0.33% for CGDV.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

CGDV currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.27 vs -0.64), 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.