CCGSX vs. PRGSX

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

CCGSX (Chautauqua Global Growth Fund) and PRGSX (T. Rowe Price Global Stock Fund) are both Global Equities funds. Over the past 5 years, CCGSX returned 6.48%/yr vs 10.12%/yr for PRGSX. Their correlation of 0.91 suggests significant overlap in exposure. CCGSX charges 1.05%/yr vs 0.82%/yr for PRGSX.

Performance

CCGSX vs. PRGSX - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Chautauqua Global Growth Fund (CCGSX) and T. Rowe Price Global Stock Fund (PRGSX). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CCGSX achieves a 0.07% return, which is significantly lower than PRGSX's 23.78% return.

CCGSX

• 1D: -0.47%
• 1M: 4.02%
• YTD: 0.07%
• 6M: 2.02%
• 1Y: 13.51%
• 3Y*: 13.78%
• 5Y*: 6.48%
• 10Y*: —

PRGSX

• 1D: 1.03%
• 1M: 10.17%
• YTD: 23.78%
• 6M: 24.65%
• 1Y: 44.27%
• 3Y*: 24.53%
• 5Y*: 10.12%
• 10Y*: 16.95%

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

CCGSX vs. PRGSX - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
CCGSX Chautauqua Global Growth Fund	0.07%	22.12%	16.07%	16.01%	-20.32%	12.64%	37.94%	29.74%	-14.81%	35.42%
PRGSX T. Rowe Price Global Stock Fund	23.78%	21.42%	16.80%	25.70%	-28.01%	9.81%	52.29%	35.84%	-4.51%	31.40%

Correlation

The correlation between CCGSX and PRGSX is 0.84, 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	0.84
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.87
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.91
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 4, 2017	0.91

The correlation between CCGSX and PRGSX has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.84 to 0.91 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

CCGSX vs. PRGSX — Risk / Return Rank

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

CCGSX

CCGSX Risk / Return Rank: 10
CCGSX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 11
CCGSX Sortino Ratio Rank: 11
CCGSX Omega Ratio Rank: 11
CCGSX Calmar Ratio Rank: 8
CCGSX Martin Ratio Rank: 9

PRGSX

PRGSX Risk / Return Rank: 69
PRGSX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 73
PRGSX Sortino Ratio Rank: 59
PRGSX Omega Ratio Rank: 61
PRGSX Calmar Ratio Rank: 77
PRGSX Martin Ratio Rank: 75

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.

CCGSX vs. PRGSX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Chautauqua Global Growth Fund (CCGSX) and T. Rowe Price Global Stock Fund (PRGSX). 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.

	CCGSX	PRGSX	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	0.87	2.48	-1.61
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	1.31	3.23	-1.93
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.16	1.44	-0.28
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.79	3.48	-2.69
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	2.60	14.22	-11.63
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

CCGSX vs. PRGSX - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CCGSX Sharpe Ratio is 0.87, which is lower than the PRGSX Sharpe Ratio of 2.48. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CCGSX and PRGSX, 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

	CCGSX	PRGSX	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.87	2.48	-1.61
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.36	0.52	-0.16
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	0.86	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.68	0.53	+0.15

Drawdowns

CCGSX vs. PRGSX - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CCGSX drawdown since its inception was -32.68%, smaller than the maximum PRGSX drawdown of -64.06%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CCGSX and PRGSX.

Drawdown Indicators

	CCGSX	PRGSX	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-32.68%	-64.06%	+31.38%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-16.92%	-12.77%	-4.15%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-17.62%	-21.13%	+3.51%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-32.68%	-38.11%	+5.43%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-38.11%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-4.71%	0.00%	-4.71%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-7.32%	-13.48%	+6.16%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	5.11%	3.11%	+2.00%

Volatility

CCGSX vs. PRGSX - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Chautauqua Global Growth Fund (CCGSX) is 4.05%, while T. Rowe Price Global Stock Fund (PRGSX) has a volatility of 5.50%. This indicates that CCGSX experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than PRGSX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	CCGSX	PRGSX	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.05%	5.50%	-1.45%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	12.53%	14.84%	-2.31%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	15.36%	17.93%	-2.57%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	18.17%	19.66%	-1.49%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	18.63%	19.77%	-1.14%

CCGSX vs. PRGSX - Expense Ratio Comparison

CCGSX has a 1.05% expense ratio, which is higher than PRGSX's 0.82% expense ratio.

Dividends

CCGSX vs. PRGSX - Dividend Comparison

CCGSX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.93%, less than PRGSX's 7.76% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
CCGSX Chautauqua Global Growth Fund	2.93%	2.93%	1.73%	0.17%	0.13%	0.35%	0.24%	1.37%	1.44%	3.52%	0.00%	0.00%
PRGSX T. Rowe Price Global Stock Fund	7.76%	9.60%	6.73%	0.27%	0.00%	13.67%	5.67%	2.21%	5.81%	0.03%	0.63%	0.33%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CCGSX and PRGSX in my portfolio?

CCGSX and PRGSX have a correlation of 0.84, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, CCGSX or PRGSX?

PRGSX has higher volatility (5.50%) compared to CCGSX (4.05%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CCGSX dropped -32.68% vs PRGSX's -64.06%.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

PRGSX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.48 vs 0.87), 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.