CGBL vs. CGCV

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

CGBL (Capital Group Core Balanced ETF) and CGCV (Capital Group Conservative Equity ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - CGBL is a Allocation--50% to 70% Equity fund actively managed by Capital Group, while CGCV is a Large Cap Value Equities fund actively managed by Capital Group. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, CGBL returned 16.68% vs 16.35% for CGCV. Their correlation of 0.84 suggests significant overlap in exposure. Both charge a 0.33% expense ratio.

Performance

CGBL vs. CGCV - Performance Comparison

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

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both stocks are quite close, with CGBL having a 6.51% return and CGCV slightly lower at 6.22%.

CGBL

• 1D: -1.19%
• 1M: 1.00%
• YTD: 6.51%
• 6M: 6.08%
• 1Y: 16.68%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

CGCV

• 1D: -0.03%
• 1M: 0.25%
• YTD: 6.22%
• 6M: 5.79%
• 1Y: 16.35%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

CGBL vs. CGCV - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
CGBL Capital Group Core Balanced ETF	6.51%	15.33%	6.44%
CGCV Capital Group Conservative Equity ETF	6.22%	16.62%	7.21%

Correlation

The correlation between CGBL and CGCV is 0.83, 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	0.83
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 27, 2024	0.84

The correlation between CGBL and CGCV has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.83 to 0.84 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

CGBL vs. CGCV — Risk / Return Rank

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

CGBL

CGBL Risk / Return Rank: 50
CGBL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 49
CGBL Sortino Ratio Rank: 50
CGBL Omega Ratio Rank: 49
CGBL Calmar Ratio Rank: 45
CGBL Martin Ratio Rank: 55

CGCV

CGCV Risk / Return Rank: 49
CGCV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 51
CGCV Sortino Ratio Rank: 50
CGCV Omega Ratio Rank: 49
CGCV Calmar Ratio Rank: 43
CGCV Martin Ratio Rank: 51

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. CGCV - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Capital Group Core Balanced ETF (CGBL) and Capital Group Conservative Equity ETF (CGCV). 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	CGCV	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.64	1.66	-0.03
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.36	2.34	+0.01
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.30	1.30	0.00
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.13	2.07	+0.05
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	9.24	8.35	+0.89

CGBL vs. CGCV - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CGBL Sharpe Ratio is 1.64, which is comparable to the CGCV Sharpe Ratio of 1.66. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CGBL and CGCV, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

CGBL vs. CGCV - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CGBL drawdown since its inception was -11.66%, smaller than the maximum CGCV drawdown of -13.13%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CGBL and CGCV.

Drawdown Indicators

	CGBL	CGCV	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-11.66%	-13.13%	+1.47%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-7.88%	-7.93%	+0.05%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.50%	-0.71%	-0.79%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.29%	-1.64%	+0.35%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.81%	1.96%	-0.15%

Volatility

CGBL vs. CGCV - Volatility Comparison

Capital Group Core Balanced ETF (CGBL) has a higher volatility of 4.18% compared to Capital Group Conservative Equity ETF (CGCV) at 2.71%. This indicates that CGBL's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CGCV based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	CGBL	CGCV	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.18%	2.71%	+1.47%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	8.54%	7.64%	+0.90%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	10.25%	9.90%	+0.35%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	11.17%	12.59%	-1.42%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	11.17%	12.59%	-1.42%

CGBL vs. CGCV - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both CGBL and CGCV have an expense ratio of 0.33%.

Dividends

CGBL vs. CGCV - Dividend Comparison

CGBL's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.87%, more than CGCV's 1.45% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023
CGBL Capital Group Core Balanced ETF	1.87%	1.98%	1.92%	0.48%
CGCV Capital Group Conservative Equity ETF	1.45%	1.44%	0.68%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CGBL and CGCV in my portfolio?

CGBL and CGCV have a correlation of 0.83, 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 CGCV?

CGBL has higher volatility (4.18%) compared to CGCV (2.71%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CGBL dropped -11.66% vs CGCV's -13.13%.

Which ETF is better, CGBL or CGCV?

On 1-year performance, CGBL leads with 16.68% vs 16.35% for CGCV. Both ETFs have the same 0.33% expense ratio. On volatility, CGCV has been the lower-risk option at 2.71%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, CGBL or CGCV?

Over the 1-year period, CGBL has performed better with a 16.68% return vs 16.35%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, CGBL or CGCV?

CGBL and CGCV have the same expense ratio: 0.33% per year.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, CGBL or CGCV?

CGBL has the higher dividend yield at 1.87%, compared with 1.45% for CGCV.

What is the main difference between CGBL and CGCV?

CGBL is categorized as Allocation--50% to 70% Equity, while CGCV is Large Cap Value Equities.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

CGCV currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.66 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.