CGDV vs. CGBL

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

CGDV (Capital Group Dividend Value ETF) and CGBL (Capital Group Core Balanced ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - CGDV is a Large Cap Value Equities fund actively managed by Capital Group, while CGBL is a Diversified Portfolio fund actively managed by Capital Group. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, CGDV returned 31.52% vs 18.31% for CGBL. Their correlation of 0.89 suggests significant overlap in exposure. Both charge a 0.33% expense ratio.

Performance

CGDV vs. CGBL - Performance Comparison

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CGDV achieves a 12.65% return, which is significantly higher than CGBL's 7.54% return.

CGDV

• 1D: 0.68%
• 1M: 5.08%
• YTD: 12.65%
• 6M: 13.07%
• 1Y: 31.52%
• 3Y*: 25.65%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

CGBL

• 1D: 0.08%
• 1M: 3.05%
• YTD: 7.54%
• 6M: 8.49%
• 1Y: 18.31%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

CGDV vs. CGBL - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
CGDV Capital Group Dividend Value ETF	12.65%	25.50%	20.10%	12.68%
CGBL Capital Group Core Balanced ETF	7.54%	15.33%	16.64%	9.80%

Correlation

The correlation between CGDV and CGBL is 0.89, 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	0.89
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 29, 2023	0.89

The correlation between CGDV and CGBL has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.89 to 0.89 - a consistent structural relationship.

CGDV vs. CGBL - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	CGDV	CGBL
Technology	34.1%	29.9%
Industrials	13.2%	16.6%
Healthcare	11.5%	8.9%
Consumer Cyclical	10.6%	8.7%
Communication Services	8.4%	8.4%
Financial Services	6.8%	11.8%
Consumer Defensive	5.5%	4.2%
Energy	3.8%	2.0%
Basic Materials	2.9%	7.2%
Utilities	2.1%	2.5%
Real Estate	1.1%	0.0%

Return for Risk

CGDV vs. CGBL — Risk / Return Rank

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

CGDV

CGDV Risk / Return Rank: 80
CGDV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 84
CGDV Sortino Ratio Rank: 85
CGDV Omega Ratio Rank: 85
CGDV Calmar Ratio Rank: 66
CGDV Martin Ratio Rank: 80

CGBL

CGBL Risk / Return Rank: 57
CGBL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 58
CGBL Sortino Ratio Rank: 60
CGBL Omega Ratio Rank: 58
CGBL Calmar Ratio Rank: 48
CGBL Martin Ratio Rank: 59

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. CGBL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Capital Group Dividend Value ETF (CGDV) and Capital Group Core Balanced ETF (CGBL). 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.

	CGDV	CGBL	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.73	1.92	+0.82
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.75	2.78	+0.97
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.51	1.35	+0.16
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.25	2.33	+0.91
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	15.36	10.36	+5.00
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

CGDV vs. CGBL - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CGDV Sharpe Ratio is 2.73, which is higher than the CGBL Sharpe Ratio of 1.92. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CGDV and CGBL, 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

	CGDV	CGBL	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.73	1.92	+0.82
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.25	1.72	-0.47

Drawdowns

CGDV vs. CGBL - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CGDV drawdown since its inception was -21.82%, which is greater than CGBL's maximum drawdown of -11.66%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CGDV and CGBL.

Drawdown Indicators

	CGDV	CGBL	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-21.82%	-11.66%	-10.16%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-9.75%	-7.88%	-1.87%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-14.28%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	-0.53%	+0.53%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.61%	-1.29%	-2.32%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.06%	1.77%	+0.29%

Volatility

CGDV vs. CGBL - Volatility Comparison

Capital Group Dividend Value ETF (CGDV) and Capital Group Core Balanced ETF (CGBL) have volatilities of 3.08% and 3.10%, 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.

Volatility by Period

	CGDV	CGBL	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.08%	3.10%	-0.02%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	9.15%	7.84%	+1.31%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	11.58%	9.60%	+1.98%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	15.48%	11.02%	+4.46%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	15.48%	11.02%	+4.46%

CGDV vs. CGBL - Expense Ratio Comparison

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

Dividends

CGDV vs. CGBL - Dividend Comparison

CGDV's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.16%, less than CGBL's 1.85% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022
CGBL Capital Group Core Balanced ETF	1.85%	1.98%	1.92%	0.48%	0.00%
CGDV Capital Group Dividend Value ETF	1.16%	1.29%	1.60%	1.65%	1.36%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CGDV and CGBL in my portfolio?

CGDV and CGBL have a correlation of 0.89, 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 CGBL?

CGBL has higher volatility (3.10%) compared to CGDV (3.08%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CGDV dropped -21.82% vs CGBL's -11.66%.

Which ETF is better, CGDV or CGBL?

On 1-year performance, CGDV leads with 31.52% vs 18.31% for CGBL. Both ETFs have the same 0.33% expense ratio. Their volatility is very similar. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, CGDV or CGBL?

Over the 1-year period, CGDV has performed better with a 31.52% return vs 18.31%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, CGDV or CGBL?

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

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

CGBL has the higher dividend yield at 1.85%, compared with 1.16% for CGDV.

What is the main difference between CGDV and CGBL?

CGDV is categorized as Large Cap Value Equities, while CGBL is Diversified Portfolio.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

CGDV currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.73 vs 1.92), 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.