CGBL vs. CCLFX

Last updated Jun 9, 2026

CGBL (Capital Group Core Balanced ETF) and CCLFX (Cliffwater Corporate Lending Fund) are both funds - CGBL is a Diversified Portfolio fund actively managed by Capital Group, while CCLFX is a High Yield Bonds fund managed by Cliffwater. Over the past year, CGBL returned 16.11% vs 7.37% for CCLFX. At a 0.10 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. CGBL charges 0.33%/yr vs 3.42%/yr for CCLFX.

Performance

CGBL vs. CCLFX - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Capital Group Core Balanced ETF (CGBL) and Cliffwater Corporate Lending Fund (CCLFX). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CGBL achieves a 5.41% return, which is significantly higher than CCLFX's 2.33% return.

CGBL

• 1D: 0.24%
• 1M: -0.56%
• YTD: 5.41%
• 6M: 6.40%
• 1Y: 16.11%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

CCLFX

• 1D: 0.00%
• 1M: 0.38%
• YTD: 2.33%
• 6M: 2.84%
• 1Y: 7.37%
• 3Y*: 10.54%
• 5Y*: 8.75%
• 10Y*: —

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

CGBL vs. CCLFX - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
CGBL Capital Group Core Balanced ETF	5.41%	15.33%	16.64%	9.80%
CCLFX Cliffwater Corporate Lending Fund	2.33%	8.93%	12.62%	3.17%

Correlation

The correlation between CGBL and CCLFX is 0.08, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.08
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 29, 2023	0.10

Return for Risk

CGBL vs. CCLFX — Risk / Return Rank

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

CGBL

CGBL Risk / Return Rank: 52
CGBL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 53
CGBL Sortino Ratio Rank: 53
CGBL Omega Ratio Rank: 54
CGBL Calmar Ratio Rank: 46
CGBL Martin Ratio Rank: 57

CCLFX

CCLFX Risk / Return Rank: 100
CCLFX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 100
CCLFX Sortino Ratio Rank: 100
CCLFX Omega Ratio Rank: 100
CCLFX Calmar Ratio Rank: 100
CCLFX Martin Ratio Rank: 100

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.

CGBL vs. CCLFX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Capital Group Core Balanced ETF (CGBL) and Cliffwater Corporate Lending Fund (CCLFX). 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.

	CGBL	CCLFX	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.64	8.60	-6.96
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.34	20.84	-18.50
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.30	7.79	-6.49
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.05	39.22	-37.17
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	9.04	218.79	-209.75
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

CGBL vs. CCLFX - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CGBL Sharpe Ratio is 1.64, which is lower than the CCLFX Sharpe Ratio of 8.60. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CGBL and CCLFX, 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

	CGBL	CCLFX	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.64	8.60	-6.96
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	5.10	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.62	4.57	-2.95

Drawdowns

CGBL vs. CCLFX - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CGBL drawdown since its inception was -11.66%, which is greater than CCLFX's maximum drawdown of -3.91%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CGBL and CCLFX.

Drawdown Indicators

	CGBL	CCLFX	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-11.66%	-3.91%	-7.75%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-7.88%	-0.19%	-7.69%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-0.46%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-2.25%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.50%	0.00%	-2.50%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.29%	-0.16%	-1.13%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.79%	0.03%	+1.76%

Volatility

CGBL vs. CCLFX - Volatility Comparison

Capital Group Core Balanced ETF (CGBL) has a higher volatility of 3.53% compared to Cliffwater Corporate Lending Fund (CCLFX) at 0.23%. This indicates that CGBL's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CCLFX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	CGBL	CCLFX	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.53%	0.23%	+3.30%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	8.17%	0.65%	+7.52%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	9.88%	0.87%	+9.01%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	11.09%	1.73%	+9.36%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	11.09%	1.87%	+9.22%

CGBL vs. CCLFX - Expense Ratio Comparison

CGBL has a 0.33% expense ratio, which is lower than CCLFX's 3.42% expense ratio.

Dividends

CGBL vs. CCLFX - Dividend Comparison

CGBL's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.89%, less than CCLFX's 10.28% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019
CCLFX Cliffwater Corporate Lending Fund	10.28%	10.47%	11.27%	10.96%	3.96%	7.03%	6.90%	0.61%
CGBL Capital Group Core Balanced ETF	1.89%	1.98%	1.92%	0.48%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CGBL and CCLFX in my portfolio?

CGBL and CCLFX have a correlation of 0.08, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, CGBL or CCLFX?

CGBL has higher volatility (3.53%) compared to CCLFX (0.23%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CGBL dropped -11.66% vs CCLFX's -3.91%.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

CCLFX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (8.60 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.