PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
CEFA vs. DBAW
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

CEFA vs. DBAW - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Global X S&P Catholic Values Developed ex-U.S. ETF (CEFA) and Xtrackers MSCI All World ex US Hedged Equity ETF (DBAW). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CEFA achieves a 7.81% return, which is significantly lower than DBAW's 16.12% return.


CEFA

1D
-0.77%
1M
3.62%
YTD
7.81%
6M
9.59%
1Y
20.44%
3Y*
15.15%
5Y*
6.64%
10Y*

DBAW

1D
-0.51%
1M
6.28%
YTD
16.12%
6M
18.39%
1Y
36.60%
3Y*
21.15%
5Y*
11.32%
10Y*
11.44%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

CEFA vs. DBAW - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020
CEFA
Global X S&P Catholic Values Developed ex-U.S. ETF
7.81%26.46%5.03%17.40%-16.66%7.97%21.61%
DBAW
Xtrackers MSCI All World ex US Hedged Equity ETF
16.12%26.47%14.35%16.26%-13.35%13.08%17.08%

Correlation

The correlation between CEFA and DBAW is 0.86, 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

0.86

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.84

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.79

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 25, 2020

0.72

The correlation between CEFA and DBAW shifts across timeframes, from 0.72 (all time) to 0.86 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

CEFA vs. DBAW - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
CEFA
DBAW

Financial Services

26.1%
24.1%

Industrials

19.2%
15.0%

Technology

10.7%
18.7%

Healthcare

10.6%
7.2%

Consumer Cyclical

8.7%
7.9%

Consumer Defensive

6.7%
5.3%

Basic Materials

5.7%
6.8%

Energy

4.4%
5.3%

Communication Services

3.6%
5.0%

Utilities

3.2%
3.2%

Real Estate

1.3%
1.5%

Financial Services

CEFA
26.1%
DBAW
24.1%

Industrials

CEFA
19.2%
DBAW
15.0%

Technology

CEFA
10.7%
DBAW
18.7%

Healthcare

CEFA
10.6%
DBAW
7.2%

Consumer Cyclical

CEFA
8.7%
DBAW
7.9%

Consumer Defensive

CEFA
6.7%
DBAW
5.3%

Basic Materials

CEFA
5.7%
DBAW
6.8%

Energy

CEFA
4.4%
DBAW
5.3%

Communication Services

CEFA
3.6%
DBAW
5.0%

Utilities

CEFA
3.2%
DBAW
3.2%

Real Estate

CEFA
1.3%
DBAW
1.5%

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

CEFA vs. DBAW — Risk / Return Rank

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

CEFA
CEFA Risk / Return Rank: 3838
Overall Rank
CEFA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3737
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CEFA Sortino Ratio Rank: 3737
Sortino Ratio Rank
CEFA Omega Ratio Rank: 3737
Omega Ratio Rank
CEFA Calmar Ratio Rank: 3636
Calmar Ratio Rank
CEFA Martin Ratio Rank: 4141
Martin Ratio Rank

DBAW
DBAW Risk / Return Rank: 8484
Overall Rank
DBAW Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8686
Sharpe Ratio Rank
DBAW Sortino Ratio Rank: 8686
Sortino Ratio Rank
DBAW Omega Ratio Rank: 8787
Omega Ratio Rank
DBAW Calmar Ratio Rank: 7979
Calmar Ratio Rank
DBAW Martin Ratio Rank: 8383
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.

CEFA vs. DBAW - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Global X S&P Catholic Values Developed ex-U.S. ETF (CEFA) and Xtrackers MSCI All World ex US Hedged Equity ETF (DBAW). 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.


CEFADBAWDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-1.52

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-1.96

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.24

1.55

-0.31

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.78

4.09

-2.31

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

6.54

16.97

-10.43

CEFA vs. DBAW - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CEFA Sharpe Ratio is 1.34, which is lower than the DBAW Sharpe Ratio of 2.86. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CEFA and DBAW, 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


CEFADBAWDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.34

2.86

-1.52

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.38

0.83

-0.45

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.75

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.63

0.63

0.00

Drawdowns

CEFA vs. DBAW - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CEFA drawdown since its inception was -31.97%, roughly equal to the maximum DBAW drawdown of -31.44%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CEFA and DBAW.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


CEFADBAWDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-31.97%

-31.44%

-0.53%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-11.54%

-9.00%

-2.54%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-15.45%

-14.11%

-1.34%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-31.97%

-17.87%

-14.10%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-31.44%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.47%

-0.51%

-0.96%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-7.05%

-5.00%

-2.05%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.13%

2.16%

+0.97%

Volatility

CEFA vs. DBAW - Volatility Comparison

Global X S&P Catholic Values Developed ex-U.S. ETF (CEFA) has a higher volatility of 5.01% compared to Xtrackers MSCI All World ex US Hedged Equity ETF (DBAW) at 4.71%. This indicates that CEFA's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than DBAW based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


CEFADBAWDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

5.01%

4.71%

+0.30%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

12.77%

11.00%

+1.77%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

15.33%

12.88%

+2.45%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

17.61%

13.74%

+3.87%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

17.21%

15.28%

+1.93%

CEFA vs. DBAW - Expense Ratio Comparison

CEFA has a 0.35% expense ratio, which is lower than DBAW's 0.41% expense ratio.


Dividends

CEFA vs. DBAW - Dividend Comparison

CEFA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.65%, less than DBAW's 3.29% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
CEFA
Global X S&P Catholic Values Developed ex-U.S. ETF
2.65%2.86%3.26%2.35%2.35%3.49%0.84%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
DBAW
Xtrackers MSCI All World ex US Hedged Equity ETF
3.29%3.83%1.70%3.45%8.81%2.05%2.08%2.91%2.93%2.41%1.99%5.74%

Frequently Asked Questions


CEFA and DBAW have a correlation of 0.86, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

CEFA has higher volatility (5.01%) compared to DBAW (4.71%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CEFA dropped -31.97% vs DBAW's -31.44%.

On 5-year performance, DBAW leads with 11.32% vs 6.64% for CEFA. On fees, CEFA is cheaper at 0.35% per year. On volatility, DBAW has been the lower-risk option at 4.71%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 5-year period, DBAW has performed better with a 11.32% return vs 6.64%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

CEFA is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.41% for DBAW.

DBAW has the higher dividend yield at 3.29%, compared with 2.65% for CEFA.

CEFA tracks S&P Developed ex-U.S. Catholic Values Index, while DBAW tracks MSCI ACWI ex USA US Dollar Hedged Index. They also come from different issuers: Global X and Deutsche Bank. Their fees differ too: 0.35% for CEFA and 0.41% for DBAW.

DBAW currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.86 vs 1.34), 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 CEFA and DBAW

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