CAML vs. VUG

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

CAML (Congress Large Cap Growth ETF) and VUG (Vanguard Growth ETF) are both Large Cap Growth Equities funds. CAML is actively managed, while VUG is passively managed. Over the past year, CAML returned 15.24% vs 27.84% for VUG. Their correlation of 0.91 suggests significant overlap in exposure. CAML charges 0.65%/yr vs 0.03%/yr for VUG.

Performance

CAML vs. VUG - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Congress Large Cap Growth ETF (CAML) and Vanguard Growth ETF (VUG). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CAML achieves a 5.82% return, which is significantly lower than VUG's 9.49% return.

CAML

• 1D: -0.86%
• 1M: 4.12%
• YTD: 5.82%
• 6M: 4.18%
• 1Y: 15.24%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

VUG

• 1D: -1.23%
• 1M: 6.22%
• YTD: 9.49%
• 6M: 8.72%
• 1Y: 27.84%
• 3Y*: 25.93%
• 5Y*: 15.11%
• 10Y*: 18.26%

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

CAML vs. VUG - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
CAML Congress Large Cap Growth ETF	5.82%	12.43%	23.24%	10.13%
VUG Vanguard Growth ETF	9.49%	19.40%	32.69%	12.01%

Correlation

The correlation between CAML and VUG is 0.91, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.91
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 23, 2023	0.91

The correlation between CAML and VUG has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.91 to 0.91 - a consistent structural relationship.

CAML vs. VUG - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	CAML	VUG
Technology	44.2%	53.5%
Consumer Cyclical	9.9%	12.2%
Communication Services	9.5%	17.3%
Financial Services	8.6%	4.3%
Industrials	8.2%	3.6%
Healthcare	6.2%	4.6%
Utilities	3.4%	0.9%
Real Estate	2.4%	1.0%
Consumer Defensive	2.3%	1.5%
Energy	2.2%	0.4%
Basic Materials	2.0%	0.6%

Return for Risk

CAML vs. VUG — Risk / Return Rank

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

CAML

CAML Risk / Return Rank: 27
CAML Sharpe Ratio Rank: 29
CAML Sortino Ratio Rank: 29
CAML Omega Ratio Rank: 28
CAML Calmar Ratio Rank: 22
CAML Martin Ratio Rank: 25

VUG

VUG Risk / Return Rank: 43
VUG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 50
VUG Sortino Ratio Rank: 47
VUG Omega Ratio Rank: 48
VUG Calmar Ratio Rank: 33
VUG Martin Ratio Rank: 37

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.

CAML vs. VUG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Congress Large Cap Growth ETF (CAML) and Vanguard Growth ETF (VUG). 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.

	CAML	VUG	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.05	1.77	-0.72
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.54	2.40	-0.86
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.19	1.31	-0.12
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.03	1.69	-0.66
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	3.39	5.92	-2.53
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

CAML vs. VUG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CAML Sharpe Ratio is 1.05, which is lower than the VUG Sharpe Ratio of 1.77. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CAML and VUG, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	CAML	VUG	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.05	1.77	-0.72
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.68	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	0.85	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.07	0.62	+0.45

Drawdowns

CAML vs. VUG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CAML drawdown since its inception was -21.06%, smaller than the maximum VUG drawdown of -50.68%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CAML and VUG.

Drawdown Indicators

	CAML	VUG	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-21.06%	-50.68%	+29.62%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-14.86%	-16.53%	+1.67%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-22.85%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-35.61%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-35.61%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.86%	-1.51%	+0.65%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.08%	-7.09%	+4.01%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.50%	4.71%	-0.21%

Volatility

CAML vs. VUG - Volatility Comparison

Congress Large Cap Growth ETF (CAML) and Vanguard Growth ETF (VUG) have volatilities of 3.65% and 3.83%, 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.

Volatility by Period

	CAML	VUG	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.65%	3.83%	-0.18%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	11.35%	12.11%	-0.76%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	14.63%	15.84%	-1.21%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	17.76%	22.22%	-4.46%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	17.76%	21.44%	-3.68%

CAML vs. VUG - Expense Ratio Comparison

CAML has a 0.65% expense ratio, which is higher than VUG's 0.03% expense ratio.

Dividends

CAML vs. VUG - Dividend Comparison

CAML has not paid dividends to shareholders, while VUG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.37%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
CAML Congress Large Cap Growth ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.06%	0.15%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
VUG Vanguard Growth ETF	0.37%	0.41%	0.47%	0.58%	0.70%	0.48%	0.66%	0.95%	1.32%	1.14%	1.39%	1.30%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CAML and VUG in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.91, CAML and VUG move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

Which is riskier, CAML or VUG?

VUG has higher volatility (3.83%) compared to CAML (3.65%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CAML dropped -21.06% vs VUG's -50.68%.

Which ETF is better, CAML or VUG?

On 1-year performance, VUG leads with 27.84% vs 15.24% for CAML. On fees, VUG is cheaper at 0.03% per year. On volatility, CAML has been the lower-risk option at 3.65%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, CAML or VUG?

Over the 1-year period, VUG has performed better with a 27.84% return vs 15.24%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, CAML or VUG?

VUG is cheaper with a 0.03% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for CAML.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, CAML or VUG?

VUG has the higher dividend yield at 0.37%, compared with 0.00% for CAML.

What is the main difference between CAML and VUG?

They also come from different issuers: Congress and Vanguard. Their fees differ too: 0.65% for CAML and 0.03% for VUG.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

VUG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.77 vs 1.05), 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.