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

Performance

CGCV vs. SFGV - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Capital Group Conservative Equity ETF (CGCV) and Sequoia Global Value ETF (SFGV). 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 6.45% return, which is significantly lower than SFGV's 12.02% return.


CGCV

1D
0.47%
1M
2.73%
YTD
6.45%
6M
6.68%
1Y
17.48%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*

SFGV

1D
0.58%
1M
2.79%
YTD
12.02%
6M
12.40%
1Y
26.07%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

CGCV vs. SFGV - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024
CGCV
Capital Group Conservative Equity ETF
6.45%16.62%7.44%
SFGV
Sequoia Global Value ETF
12.02%18.84%2.51%

Correlation

The correlation between CGCV and SFGV is 0.82, 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

0.82

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

0.84

The correlation between CGCV and SFGV has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.82 to 0.84 - a consistent structural relationship.

CGCV vs. SFGV - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
CGCV
SFGV

Technology

23.6%
11.4%

Healthcare

13.9%
12.7%

Financial Services

12.2%
10.5%

Consumer Defensive

10.0%
8.8%

Industrials

9.9%
13.7%

Utilities

8.6%
1.0%

Consumer Cyclical

7.0%
15.3%

Energy

5.4%
11.4%

Communication Services

4.9%
3.4%

Basic Materials

2.9%
6.0%

Real Estate

1.8%
5.9%

Technology

CGCV
23.6%
SFGV
11.4%

Healthcare

CGCV
13.9%
SFGV
12.7%

Financial Services

CGCV
12.2%
SFGV
10.5%

Consumer Defensive

CGCV
10.0%
SFGV
8.8%

Industrials

CGCV
9.9%
SFGV
13.7%

Utilities

CGCV
8.6%
SFGV
1.0%

Consumer Cyclical

CGCV
7.0%
SFGV
15.3%

Energy

CGCV
5.4%
SFGV
11.4%

Communication Services

CGCV
4.9%
SFGV
3.4%

Basic Materials

CGCV
2.9%
SFGV
6.0%

Real Estate

CGCV
1.8%
SFGV
5.9%

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. SFGV — Risk / Return Rank

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

CGCV
CGCV Risk / Return Rank: 5252
Overall Rank
CGCV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5454
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CGCV Sortino Ratio Rank: 5454
Sortino Ratio Rank
CGCV Omega Ratio Rank: 5353
Omega Ratio Rank
CGCV Calmar Ratio Rank: 4545
Calmar Ratio Rank
CGCV Martin Ratio Rank: 5353
Martin Ratio Rank

SFGV
SFGV Risk / Return Rank: 6868
Overall Rank
SFGV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7070
Sharpe Ratio Rank
SFGV Sortino Ratio Rank: 7373
Sortino Ratio Rank
SFGV Omega Ratio Rank: 6969
Omega Ratio Rank
SFGV Calmar Ratio Rank: 6464
Calmar Ratio Rank
SFGV Martin Ratio Rank: 6565
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. SFGV - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Capital Group Conservative Equity ETF (CGCV) and Sequoia Global Value ETF (SFGV). 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.


CGCVSFGVDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.45

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.70

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.33

1.40

-0.08

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.21

3.13

-0.92

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

8.94

11.71

-2.77

CGCV vs. SFGV - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CGCV Sharpe Ratio is 1.81, which is comparable to the SFGV Sharpe Ratio of 2.26. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CGCV and SFGV, 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


CGCVSFGVDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.81

2.26

-0.45

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

1.28

1.35

-0.07

Drawdowns

CGCV vs. SFGV - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CGCV drawdown since its inception was -13.13%, smaller than the maximum SFGV drawdown of -14.51%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CGCV and SFGV.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


CGCVSFGVDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-13.13%

-14.51%

+1.38%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-7.93%

-8.36%

+0.43%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

0.00%

0.00%

0.00%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-1.67%

-1.89%

+0.22%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.96%

2.23%

-0.27%

Volatility

CGCV vs. SFGV - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Capital Group Conservative Equity ETF (CGCV) is 2.39%, while Sequoia Global Value ETF (SFGV) has a volatility of 2.83%. This indicates that CGCV experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than SFGV based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


CGCVSFGVDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

2.39%

2.83%

-0.44%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

7.46%

8.64%

-1.18%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

9.72%

11.59%

-1.87%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

12.64%

13.25%

-0.61%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

12.64%

13.25%

-0.61%

CGCV vs. SFGV - Expense Ratio Comparison

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


Dividends

CGCV vs. SFGV - Dividend Comparison

CGCV's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.45%, less than SFGV's 2.24% yield.


PositionTTM20252024
CGCV
Capital Group Conservative Equity ETF
1.45%1.44%0.68%
SFGV
Sequoia Global Value ETF
2.24%2.52%2.23%

Frequently Asked Questions


CGCV and SFGV have a correlation of 0.82, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

SFGV has higher volatility (2.83%) compared to CGCV (2.39%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CGCV dropped -13.13% vs SFGV's -14.51%.

On 1-year performance, SFGV leads with 26.07% vs 17.48% for CGCV. Both ETFs have the same 0.33% expense ratio. On volatility, CGCV has been the lower-risk option at 2.39%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, SFGV has performed better with a 26.07% return vs 17.48%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

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

SFGV has the higher dividend yield at 2.24%, compared with 1.45% for CGCV.

CGCV is categorized as Large Cap Value Equities, while SFGV is Global Equities. They also come from different issuers: Capital Group and Sequoia.

SFGV currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.26 vs 1.81), 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 SFGV

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