CGBL vs. AOM
CGBL (Capital Group Core Balanced ETF) and AOM (iShares Core Moderate Allocation ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - CGBL is a Allocation--50% to 70% Equity fund actively managed by Capital Group, while AOM is a Diversified Portfolio fund tracking the S&P Target Risk Moderate. CGBL is actively managed, while AOM is passively managed. Over the past year, CGBL returned 16.68% vs 12.96% for AOM. Their correlation of 0.87 suggests significant overlap in exposure. CGBL charges 0.33%/yr vs 0.25%/yr for AOM.
Performance
CGBL vs. AOM - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, CGBL achieves a 6.51% return, which is significantly higher than AOM's 4.39% return.
CGBL
- 1D
- -1.19%
- 1M
- 1.00%
- YTD
- 6.51%
- 6M
- 6.08%
- 1Y
- 16.68%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
AOM
- 1D
- -0.76%
- 1M
- 0.20%
- YTD
- 4.39%
- 6M
- 4.21%
- 1Y
- 12.96%
- 3Y*
- 10.58%
- 5Y*
- 4.63%
- 10Y*
- 6.31%
CGBL vs. AOM - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
CGBL Capital Group Core Balanced ETF | 6.51% | 15.33% | 16.64% | 10.10% |
AOM iShares Core Moderate Allocation ETF | 4.39% | 13.28% | 7.95% | 8.72% |
Correlation
The correlation between CGBL and AOM is 0.90, 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 | 0.90 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 28, 2023 | 0.87 |
The correlation between CGBL and AOM has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.87 to 0.90 - a consistent structural relationship.
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
CGBL vs. AOM — Risk / Return Rank
CGBL
AOM
CGBL vs. AOM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Capital Group Core Balanced ETF (CGBL) and iShares Core Moderate Allocation ETF (AOM). 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.
Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.
| CGBL | AOM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.24 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.36 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.30 | 1.35 | -0.05 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.13 | 2.55 | -0.42 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 9.24 | 10.96 | -1.71 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
CGBL vs. AOM - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CGBL drawdown since its inception was -11.66%, smaller than the maximum AOM drawdown of -19.96%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CGBL and AOM.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| CGBL | AOM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -11.66% | -19.96% | +8.30% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -7.88% | -5.11% | -2.77% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -6.85% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -19.96% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -19.96% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -1.50% | -1.04% | -0.46% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -1.29% | -2.69% | +1.40% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.81% | 1.19% | +0.62% |
Volatility
CGBL vs. AOM - Volatility Comparison
Capital Group Core Balanced ETF (CGBL) has a higher volatility of 4.18% compared to iShares Core Moderate Allocation ETF (AOM) at 2.78%. This indicates that CGBL's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than AOM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| CGBL | AOM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 4.18% | 2.78% | +1.40% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 8.54% | 5.70% | +2.84% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 10.25% | 6.94% | +3.31% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 11.17% | 8.21% | +2.96% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 11.17% | 7.94% | +3.23% |
CGBL vs. AOM - Expense Ratio Comparison
CGBL has a 0.33% expense ratio, which is higher than AOM's 0.25% expense ratio.
Dividends
CGBL vs. AOM - Dividend Comparison
CGBL's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.87%, less than AOM's 3.00% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
AOM iShares Core Moderate Allocation ETF | 3.00% | 2.98% | 3.10% | 2.79% | 2.27% | 1.56% | 2.02% | 2.66% | 2.53% | 3.31% | 2.14% | 1.98% |
CGBL Capital Group Core Balanced ETF | 1.87% | 1.98% | 1.92% | 0.48% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
CGBL and AOM have a correlation of 0.90, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
CGBL has higher volatility (4.18%) compared to AOM (2.78%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CGBL dropped -11.66% vs AOM's -19.96%.
On 1-year performance, CGBL leads with 16.68% vs 12.96% for AOM. On fees, AOM is cheaper at 0.25% per year. On volatility, AOM has been the lower-risk option at 2.78%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, CGBL has performed better with a 16.68% return vs 12.96%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
AOM is cheaper with a 0.25% expense ratio, compared with 0.33% for CGBL.
AOM has the higher dividend yield at 3.00%, compared with 1.87% for CGBL.
CGBL is categorized as Allocation--50% to 70% Equity, while AOM is Diversified Portfolio. They also come from different issuers: Capital Group and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.33% for CGBL and 0.25% for AOM.
AOM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.88 vs 1.64), 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.
Find the right allocation for CGBL and AOM
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