PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
CGCV vs. BUSA
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

CGCV vs. BUSA - Performance Comparison

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

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CGCV achieves a 5.95% return, which is significantly lower than BUSA's 6.93% return.


CGCV

1D
-0.25%
1M
2.81%
YTD
5.95%
6M
6.19%
1Y
16.96%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*

BUSA

1D
-0.17%
1M
1.70%
YTD
6.93%
6M
9.34%
1Y
22.40%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

CGCV vs. BUSA - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024
CGCV
Capital Group Conservative Equity ETF
5.95%16.62%7.44%
BUSA
Brandes U.S. Value ETF
6.93%17.56%7.24%

Correlation

The correlation between CGCV and BUSA is 0.76, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.76

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 28, 2024

0.82

The correlation between CGCV and BUSA has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.76 to 0.82 - a consistent structural relationship.

CGCV vs. BUSA - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
CGCV
BUSA

Technology

23.6%
12.9%

Healthcare

13.9%
23.8%

Financial Services

12.2%
20.1%

Consumer Defensive

10.0%
5.1%

Industrials

9.9%
12.4%

Utilities

8.6%
3.4%

Consumer Cyclical

7.0%
4.9%

Energy

5.4%
7.3%

Communication Services

4.9%
5.6%

Basic Materials

2.9%
4.1%

Real Estate

1.8%

-

Technology

CGCV
23.6%
BUSA
12.9%

Healthcare

CGCV
13.9%
BUSA
23.8%

Financial Services

CGCV
12.2%
BUSA
20.1%

Consumer Defensive

CGCV
10.0%
BUSA
5.1%

Industrials

CGCV
9.9%
BUSA
12.4%

Utilities

CGCV
8.6%
BUSA
3.4%

Consumer Cyclical

CGCV
7.0%
BUSA
4.9%

Energy

CGCV
5.4%
BUSA
7.3%

Communication Services

CGCV
4.9%
BUSA
5.6%

Basic Materials

CGCV
2.9%
BUSA
4.1%

Real Estate

CGCV
1.8%
BUSA

-

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

CGCV vs. BUSA — Risk / Return Rank

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

CGCV
CGCV Risk / Return Rank: 4949
Overall Rank
CGCV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5050
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CGCV Sortino Ratio Rank: 5050
Sortino Ratio Rank
CGCV Omega Ratio Rank: 5050
Omega Ratio Rank
CGCV Calmar Ratio Rank: 4343
Calmar Ratio Rank
CGCV Martin Ratio Rank: 5151
Martin Ratio Rank

BUSA
BUSA Risk / Return Rank: 5656
Overall Rank
BUSA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5555
Sharpe Ratio Rank
BUSA Sortino Ratio Rank: 5656
Sortino Ratio Rank
BUSA Omega Ratio Rank: 5454
Omega Ratio Rank
BUSA Calmar Ratio Rank: 6060
Calmar Ratio Rank
BUSA Martin Ratio Rank: 5757
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.

CGCV vs. BUSA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Capital Group Conservative Equity ETF (CGCV) and Brandes U.S. Value ETF (BUSA). 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.


CGCVBUSADifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

1.75

1.90

-0.15

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

2.47

2.72

-0.25

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

1.32

1.34

-0.02

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

2.15

2.96

-0.81

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

8.67

10.06

-1.38

CGCV vs. BUSA - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CGCV Sharpe Ratio is 1.75, which is comparable to the BUSA Sharpe Ratio of 1.90. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CGCV and BUSA, 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


CGCVBUSADifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.75

1.90

-0.15

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

1.26

1.45

-0.19

Drawdowns

CGCV vs. BUSA - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CGCV drawdown since its inception was -13.13%, smaller than the maximum BUSA drawdown of -14.19%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CGCV and BUSA.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


CGCVBUSADifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-13.13%

-14.19%

+1.06%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-7.93%

-7.61%

-0.32%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.25%

-0.86%

+0.61%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-1.67%

-2.15%

+0.48%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.96%

2.23%

-0.27%

Volatility

CGCV vs. BUSA - Volatility Comparison

Capital Group Conservative Equity ETF (CGCV) and Brandes U.S. Value ETF (BUSA) have volatilities of 2.41% and 2.50%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


CGCVBUSADifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

2.41%

2.50%

-0.09%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

7.45%

8.44%

-0.99%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

9.72%

11.82%

-2.10%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

12.65%

13.65%

-1.00%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

12.65%

13.65%

-1.00%

CGCV vs. BUSA - Expense Ratio Comparison

CGCV has a 0.33% expense ratio, which is lower than BUSA's 0.60% expense ratio.


Dividends

CGCV vs. BUSA - Dividend Comparison

CGCV's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.46%, less than BUSA's 1.48% yield.


PositionTTM202520242023
BUSA
Brandes U.S. Value ETF
1.48%1.53%1.37%0.22%
CGCV
Capital Group Conservative Equity ETF
1.46%1.44%0.68%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


CGCV and BUSA have a correlation of 0.76, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

BUSA has higher volatility (2.50%) compared to CGCV (2.41%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CGCV dropped -13.13% vs BUSA's -14.19%.

On 1-year performance, BUSA leads with 22.40% vs 16.96% for CGCV. On fees, CGCV is cheaper at 0.33% per year. Their volatility is very similar. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, BUSA has performed better with a 22.40% return vs 16.96%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

CGCV is cheaper with a 0.33% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for BUSA.

BUSA has the higher dividend yield at 1.48%, compared with 1.46% for CGCV.

They also come from different issuers: Capital Group and Brandes. Their fees differ too: 0.33% for CGCV and 0.60% for BUSA.

BUSA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.90 vs 1.75), 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 CGCV and BUSA

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