CGDV vs. BABO

Last updated Jun 13, 2026

CGDV (Capital Group Dividend Value ETF) and BABO (YieldMax BABA Option Income Strategy ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - CGDV is a Large Cap Value Equities fund actively managed by Capital Group, while BABO is a Derivative Income fund actively managed by YieldMax. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, CGDV returned 28.33% vs -1.50% for BABO. At a 0.29 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. CGDV charges 0.33%/yr vs 0.99%/yr for BABO.

Performance

CGDV vs. BABO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Capital Group Dividend Value ETF (CGDV) and YieldMax BABA Option Income Strategy ETF (BABO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CGDV achieves a 11.55% return, which is significantly higher than BABO's -20.64% return.

CGDV

• 1D: 0.66%
• 1M: 0.35%
• YTD: 11.55%
• 6M: 12.50%
• 1Y: 28.33%
• 3Y*: 24.15%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

BABO

• 1D: -0.37%
• 1M: -16.79%
• YTD: -20.64%
• 6M: -24.20%
• 1Y: -1.50%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

CGDV vs. BABO - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
CGDV Capital Group Dividend Value ETF	11.55%	25.50%	7.16%
BABO YieldMax BABA Option Income Strategy ETF	-20.64%	46.84%	0.65%

Correlation

The correlation between CGDV and BABO is 0.29, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.29
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 8, 2024	0.29

Return for Risk

CGDV vs. BABO — Risk / Return Rank

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

CGDV

CGDV Risk / Return Rank: 78
CGDV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 82
CGDV Sortino Ratio Rank: 81
CGDV Omega Ratio Rank: 82
CGDV Calmar Ratio Rank: 65
CGDV Martin Ratio Rank: 79

BABO

BABO Risk / Return Rank: 8
BABO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8
BABO Sortino Ratio Rank: 9
BABO Omega Ratio Rank: 9
BABO Calmar Ratio Rank: 8
BABO Martin Ratio Rank: 8

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.

CGDV vs. BABO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Capital Group Dividend Value ETF (CGDV) and YieldMax BABA Option Income Strategy ETF (BABO). 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.

	CGDV	BABO	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.27	-0.12	+2.40
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.11	0.08	+3.03
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.42	1.01	+0.41
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.83	-0.13	+2.96
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	13.19	-0.28	+13.47

CGDV vs. BABO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CGDV Sharpe Ratio is 2.27, which is higher than the BABO Sharpe Ratio of -0.12. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CGDV and BABO, 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

CGDV vs. BABO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CGDV drawdown since its inception was -21.82%, smaller than the maximum BABO drawdown of -33.33%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CGDV and BABO.

Drawdown Indicators

	CGDV	BABO	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-21.82%	-33.33%	+11.51%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-9.75%	-33.33%	+23.58%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-14.28%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.98%	-33.33%	+32.35%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.60%	-13.90%	+10.30%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.09%	15.34%	-13.25%

Volatility

CGDV vs. BABO - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Capital Group Dividend Value ETF (CGDV) is 4.52%, while YieldMax BABA Option Income Strategy ETF (BABO) has a volatility of 8.72%. This indicates that CGDV experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than BABO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	CGDV	BABO	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.52%	8.72%	-4.20%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	9.80%	24.44%	-14.64%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	12.13%	35.33%	-23.20%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	15.57%	36.67%	-21.10%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	15.57%	36.67%	-21.10%

CGDV vs. BABO - Expense Ratio Comparison

CGDV has a 0.33% expense ratio, which is lower than BABO's 0.99% expense ratio.

Dividends

CGDV vs. BABO - Dividend Comparison

CGDV's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.17%, less than BABO's 98.48% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022
BABO YieldMax BABA Option Income Strategy ETF	98.48%	85.50%	20.65%	0.00%	0.00%
CGDV Capital Group Dividend Value ETF	1.17%	1.29%	1.60%	1.65%	1.36%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CGDV and BABO in my portfolio?

CGDV and BABO have a correlation of 0.29, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, CGDV or BABO?

BABO has higher volatility (8.72%) compared to CGDV (4.52%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CGDV dropped -21.82% vs BABO's -33.33%.

Which ETF is better, CGDV or BABO?

On 1-year performance, CGDV leads with 28.33% vs -1.50% for BABO. On fees, CGDV is cheaper at 0.33% per year. On volatility, CGDV has been the lower-risk option at 4.52%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, CGDV or BABO?

Over the 1-year period, CGDV has performed better with a 28.33% return vs -1.50%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, CGDV or BABO?

CGDV is cheaper with a 0.33% expense ratio, compared with 0.99% for BABO.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, CGDV or BABO?

BABO has the higher dividend yield at 98.48%, compared with 1.17% for CGDV.

What is the main difference between CGDV and BABO?

CGDV is categorized as Large Cap Value Equities, while BABO is Derivative Income. They also come from different issuers: Capital Group and YieldMax. Their fees differ too: 0.33% for CGDV and 0.99% for BABO.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

CGDV currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.27 vs -0.12), 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.