PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
CATF vs. FDG
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

CATF vs. FDG - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in American Century California Municipal Bond ETF (CATF) and American Century Focused Dynamic Growth ETF (FDG). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CATF achieves a 1.92% return, which is significantly lower than FDG's 7.52% return.


CATF

1D
-0.15%
1M
0.55%
YTD
1.92%
6M
1.99%
1Y
7.98%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*

FDG

1D
-2.00%
1M
3.68%
YTD
7.52%
6M
9.17%
1Y
31.12%
3Y*
29.27%
5Y*
12.61%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

CATF vs. FDG - Yearly Performance Comparison


Correlation

The correlation between CATF and FDG is 0.22, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.22

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 19, 2024

0.12

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

CATF vs. FDG — Risk / Return Rank

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

CATF
CATF Risk / Return Rank: 7474
Overall Rank
CATF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7979
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CATF Sortino Ratio Rank: 8787
Sortino Ratio Rank
CATF Omega Ratio Rank: 8787
Omega Ratio Rank
CATF Calmar Ratio Rank: 5959
Calmar Ratio Rank
CATF Martin Ratio Rank: 5858
Martin Ratio Rank

FDG
FDG Risk / Return Rank: 4646
Overall Rank
FDG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5050
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FDG Sortino Ratio Rank: 4848
Sortino Ratio Rank
FDG Omega Ratio Rank: 4747
Omega Ratio Rank
FDG Calmar Ratio Rank: 4040
Calmar Ratio Rank
FDG Martin Ratio Rank: 4343
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

CATF vs. FDG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for American Century California Municipal Bond ETF (CATF) and American Century Focused Dynamic Growth ETF (FDG). 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.


CATFFDGDifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

2.55

1.76

+0.79

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

3.89

2.37

+1.52

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

1.54

1.30

+0.23

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

2.90

1.99

+0.91

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

10.17

7.02

+3.15

CATF vs. FDG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CATF Sharpe Ratio is 2.55, which is higher than the FDG Sharpe Ratio of 1.76. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CATF and FDG, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


CATFFDGDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.55

1.76

+0.79

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.51

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.79

0.92

-0.13

Drawdowns

CATF vs. FDG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CATF drawdown since its inception was -4.83%, smaller than the maximum FDG drawdown of -43.69%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CATF and FDG.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


CATFFDGDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-4.83%

-43.69%

+38.86%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-2.77%

-15.71%

+12.94%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-26.14%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-43.69%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.58%

-3.13%

+2.55%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-1.27%

-13.43%

+12.16%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

0.79%

4.45%

-3.66%

Volatility

CATF vs. FDG - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for American Century California Municipal Bond ETF (CATF) is 1.06%, while American Century Focused Dynamic Growth ETF (FDG) has a volatility of 5.18%. This indicates that CATF experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FDG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


CATFFDGDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

1.06%

5.18%

-4.12%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

2.18%

14.03%

-11.85%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

3.14%

17.77%

-14.63%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

4.33%

24.67%

-20.34%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

4.33%

24.90%

-20.57%

CATF vs. FDG - Expense Ratio Comparison

CATF has a 0.27% expense ratio, which is lower than FDG's 0.45% expense ratio.


Dividends

CATF vs. FDG - Dividend Comparison

CATF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.22%, while FDG has not paid dividends to shareholders.


PositionTTM202520242023202220212020
CATF
American Century California Municipal Bond ETF
3.22%3.40%1.32%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
FDG
American Century Focused Dynamic Growth ETF
0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.01%

Frequently Asked Questions


CATF and FDG have a correlation of 0.22, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

FDG has higher volatility (5.18%) compared to CATF (1.06%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CATF dropped -4.83% vs FDG's -43.69%.

On 1-year performance, FDG leads with 31.12% vs 7.98% for CATF. On fees, CATF is cheaper at 0.27% per year. On volatility, CATF has been the lower-risk option at 1.06%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, FDG has performed better with a 31.12% return vs 7.98%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

CATF is cheaper with a 0.27% expense ratio, compared with 0.45% for FDG.

CATF has the higher dividend yield at 3.22%, compared with 0.00% for FDG.

CATF is categorized as Municipal Bonds, while FDG is Global Equities. Their fees differ too: 0.27% for CATF and 0.45% for FDG.

CATF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.55 vs 1.76), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for CATF and FDG

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