CGDG vs. INKM

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

CGDG (Capital Group Dividend Growers ETF) and INKM (SPDR SSgA Income Allocation ETF) are both Global Equities funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, CGDG returned 15.66% vs 13.00% for INKM. A 0.79 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. CGDG charges 0.47%/yr vs 0.50%/yr for INKM.

Performance

CGDG vs. INKM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Capital Group Dividend Growers ETF (CGDG) and SPDR SSgA Income Allocation ETF (INKM). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CGDG achieves a 4.98% return, which is significantly lower than INKM's 5.61% return.

CGDG

• 1D: -0.45%
• 1M: 1.00%
• YTD: 4.98%
• 6M: 5.58%
• 1Y: 15.66%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

INKM

• 1D: -0.29%
• 1M: 0.93%
• YTD: 5.61%
• 6M: 5.74%
• 1Y: 13.00%
• 3Y*: 10.04%
• 5Y*: 3.96%
• 10Y*: 5.59%

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

CGDG vs. INKM - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
CGDG Capital Group Dividend Growers ETF	4.98%	22.74%	11.52%	9.54%
INKM SPDR SSgA Income Allocation ETF	5.61%	11.86%	5.70%	9.19%

Correlation

The correlation between CGDG and INKM is 0.85, 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	0.85
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 29, 2023	0.79

The correlation between CGDG and INKM has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.79 to 0.85 - a consistent structural relationship.

CGDG vs. INKM - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	CGDG	INKM
Financial Services	20.0%	8.3%
Technology	14.1%	13.2%
Industrials	11.4%	14.6%
Consumer Defensive	10.1%	8.6%
Healthcare	8.8%	6.8%
Utilities	8.7%	13.9%
Energy	7.8%	11.1%
Consumer Cyclical	7.8%	5.1%
Basic Materials	5.0%	1.4%
Communication Services	3.2%	6.2%
Real Estate	3.2%	10.9%

Return for Risk

CGDG vs. INKM — Risk / Return Rank

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

CGDG

CGDG Risk / Return Rank: 42
CGDG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 41
CGDG Sortino Ratio Rank: 40
CGDG Omega Ratio Rank: 39
CGDG Calmar Ratio Rank: 41
CGDG Martin Ratio Rank: 47

INKM

INKM Risk / Return Rank: 65
INKM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 66
INKM Sortino Ratio Rank: 68
INKM Omega Ratio Rank: 69
INKM Calmar Ratio Rank: 58
INKM Martin Ratio Rank: 63

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.

CGDG vs. INKM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Capital Group Dividend Growers ETF (CGDG) and SPDR SSgA Income Allocation ETF (INKM). 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.

	CGDG	INKM	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	1.48	2.20	-0.71
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	2.08	3.12	-1.04
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.26	1.42	-0.16
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.04	2.87	-0.83
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	7.88	11.30	-3.42
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

CGDG vs. INKM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CGDG Sharpe Ratio is 1.48, which is lower than the INKM Sharpe Ratio of 2.20. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CGDG and INKM, 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

	CGDG	INKM	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.48	2.20	-0.71
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.48	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	0.57	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.53	0.57	+0.96

Drawdowns

CGDG vs. INKM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CGDG drawdown since its inception was -10.52%, smaller than the maximum INKM drawdown of -28.58%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CGDG and INKM.

Drawdown Indicators

	CGDG	INKM	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-10.52%	-28.58%	+18.06%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-7.72%	-4.55%	-3.17%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-9.25%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-19.18%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-28.58%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.41%	-0.33%	-1.08%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.32%	-3.69%	+2.37%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.99%	1.15%	+0.84%

Volatility

CGDG vs. INKM - Volatility Comparison

Capital Group Dividend Growers ETF (CGDG) has a higher volatility of 3.24% compared to SPDR SSgA Income Allocation ETF (INKM) at 1.67%. This indicates that CGDG's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than INKM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	CGDG	INKM	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.24%	1.67%	+1.57%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	8.28%	4.59%	+3.69%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	10.63%	5.95%	+4.68%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	12.16%	8.30%	+3.86%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	12.16%	9.78%	+2.38%

CGDG vs. INKM - Expense Ratio Comparison

CGDG has a 0.47% expense ratio, which is lower than INKM's 0.50% expense ratio.

Dividends

CGDG vs. INKM - Dividend Comparison

CGDG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.88%, less than INKM's 4.86% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
CGDG Capital Group Dividend Growers ETF	1.88%	1.95%	2.15%	0.39%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
INKM SPDR SSgA Income Allocation ETF	4.86%	5.82%	4.83%	4.56%	5.03%	3.74%	3.88%	4.38%	4.08%	3.10%	3.39%	3.45%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CGDG and INKM in my portfolio?

CGDG and INKM have a correlation of 0.85, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, CGDG or INKM?

CGDG has higher volatility (3.24%) compared to INKM (1.67%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CGDG dropped -10.52% vs INKM's -28.58%.

Which ETF is better, CGDG or INKM?

On 1-year performance, CGDG leads with 15.66% vs 13.00% for INKM. On fees, CGDG is cheaper at 0.47% per year. On volatility, INKM has been the lower-risk option at 1.67%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, CGDG or INKM?

Over the 1-year period, CGDG has performed better with a 15.66% return vs 13.00%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, CGDG or INKM?

CGDG is cheaper with a 0.47% expense ratio, compared with 0.50% for INKM.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, CGDG or INKM?

INKM has the higher dividend yield at 4.86%, compared with 1.88% for CGDG.

What is the main difference between CGDG and INKM?

They also come from different issuers: Capital Group and State Street. Their fees differ too: 0.47% for CGDG and 0.50% for INKM.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

INKM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.20 vs 1.48), 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.