CFLGX vs. EMO
Compare and contrast key facts about ClearBridge Tactical Dividend Income Fund (CFLGX) and ClearBridge Energy Midstream Opportunity Fund (EMO).
CFLGX is managed by Franklin Templeton. It was launched on Oct 19, 1990. EMO is an actively managed fund by Franklin Templeton. It was launched on Jun 10, 2011.
Performance
CFLGX vs. EMO - Performance Comparison
Loading graphics...
CFLGX vs. EMO - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CFLGX ClearBridge Tactical Dividend Income Fund | 0.40% | 4.21% | 19.62% | 19.36% | -10.34% | 25.71% | 0.32% | 30.94% | -6.04% | 6.69% |
EMO ClearBridge Energy Midstream Opportunity Fund | 16.71% | 7.38% | 44.45% | 31.76% | 40.13% | 74.70% | -64.47% | 19.60% | -25.73% | 0.07% |
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, CFLGX achieves a 0.40% return, which is significantly lower than EMO's 16.71% return. Both investments have delivered pretty close results over the past 10 years, with CFLGX having a 9.33% annualized return and EMO not far behind at 9.14%.
CFLGX
- 1D
- 0.77%
- 1M
- -5.84%
- YTD
- 0.40%
- 6M
- 1.20%
- 1Y
- 7.18%
- 3Y*
- 12.59%
- 5Y*
- 9.52%
- 10Y*
- 9.33%
EMO
- 1D
- -3.45%
- 1M
- -3.66%
- YTD
- 16.71%
- 6M
- 19.20%
- 1Y
- 14.50%
- 3Y*
- 33.42%
- 5Y*
- 32.26%
- 10Y*
- 9.14%
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
CFLGX vs. EMO - Expense Ratio Comparison
CFLGX has a 1.44% expense ratio, which is lower than EMO's 13.90% expense ratio.
Return for Risk
CFLGX vs. EMO — Risk / Return Rank
CFLGX
EMO
CFLGX vs. EMO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ClearBridge Tactical Dividend Income Fund (CFLGX) and ClearBridge Energy Midstream Opportunity Fund (EMO). 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.
| CFLGX | EMO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | 0.50 | 0.67 | -0.17 |
Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | 0.76 | 1.00 | -0.23 |
Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.12 | 1.15 | -0.03 |
Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.62 | 0.81 | -0.19 |
Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 2.83 | 2.44 | +0.40 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading graphics...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| CFLGX | EMO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.50 | 0.67 | -0.17 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.67 | 1.21 | -0.54 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.57 | 0.22 | +0.35 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.40 | 0.11 | +0.29 |
Correlation
The correlation between CFLGX and EMO is 0.59, which is considered to be moderate. This suggests that the two assets have some degree of positive relationship in their price movements. Moderate correlation can be acceptable for portfolio diversification, offering a balance between risk and potential returns.
Dividends
CFLGX vs. EMO - Dividend Comparison
CFLGX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.60%, less than EMO's 8.40% yield.
| TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CFLGX ClearBridge Tactical Dividend Income Fund | 3.60% | 4.38% | 3.14% | 3.61% | 4.15% | 3.62% | 4.47% | 4.17% | 5.20% | 4.89% | 5.15% | 6.13% |
EMO ClearBridge Energy Midstream Opportunity Fund | 8.40% | 9.41% | 7.16% | 6.79% | 6.71% | 6.71% | 15.82% | 10.94% | 16.39% | 10.85% | 9.76% | 11.88% |
Drawdowns
CFLGX vs. EMO - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CFLGX drawdown since its inception was -61.49%, smaller than the maximum EMO drawdown of -95.06%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CFLGX and EMO.
Loading graphics...
Drawdown Indicators
| CFLGX | EMO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -61.49% | -95.06% | +33.57% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -12.54% | -18.81% | +6.27% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -18.39% | -28.59% | +10.20% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -42.07% | -93.02% | +50.95% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -5.84% | -5.90% | +0.06% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -15.56% | -32.26% | +16.70% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.72% | 6.23% | -3.51% |
Volatility
CFLGX vs. EMO - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for ClearBridge Tactical Dividend Income Fund (CFLGX) is 3.39%, while ClearBridge Energy Midstream Opportunity Fund (EMO) has a volatility of 5.53%. This indicates that CFLGX experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than EMO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading graphics...
Volatility by Period
| CFLGX | EMO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 3.39% | 5.53% | -2.14% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 7.34% | 11.68% | -4.34% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 14.64% | 21.67% | -7.03% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 14.27% | 26.82% | -12.55% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 16.44% | 41.42% | -24.98% |