CGDV vs. FDVV

Last updated Jun 18, 2026

CGDV (Capital Group Dividend Value ETF) and FDVV (Fidelity High Dividend ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - CGDV is a Large Cap Value Equities fund actively managed by Capital Group, while FDVV is a Large Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the Fidelity Core Dividend Index. CGDV is actively managed, while FDVV is passively managed. Over the past 3 years, CGDV returned 23.66%/yr vs 18.83%/yr for FDVV. Their correlation of 0.91 suggests significant overlap in exposure. CGDV charges 0.33%/yr vs 0.29%/yr for FDVV.

Performance

CGDV vs. FDVV - Performance Comparison

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CGDV achieves a 11.41% return, which is significantly higher than FDVV's 8.19% return.

CGDV

• 1D: -1.08%
• 1M: 1.66%
• YTD: 11.41%
• 6M: 13.80%
• 1Y: 28.44%
• 3Y*: 23.66%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

FDVV

• 1D: -1.47%
• 1M: 2.27%
• YTD: 8.19%
• 6M: 9.28%
• 1Y: 22.87%
• 3Y*: 18.83%
• 5Y*: 14.21%
• 10Y*: —

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

CGDV vs. FDVV - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
CGDV Capital Group Dividend Value ETF	11.41%	25.50%	20.10%	28.81%	-0.44%
FDVV Fidelity High Dividend ETF	8.19%	17.08%	21.81%	18.00%	-0.71%

Correlation

The correlation between CGDV and FDVV is 0.81, 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	0.81
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.87
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 24, 2022	0.91

The correlation between CGDV and FDVV shifts across timeframes, from 0.81 (1 year) to 0.91 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

CGDV vs. FDVV - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	CGDV	FDVV
Technology	34.1%	30.5%
Industrials	13.2%	3.0%
Healthcare	11.5%	3.0%
Consumer Cyclical	10.6%	13.6%
Communication Services	8.4%	3.6%
Financial Services	6.8%	17.0%
Consumer Defensive	5.5%	10.7%
Energy	3.8%	-
Basic Materials	2.9%	-
Utilities	2.1%	8.6%
Real Estate	1.1%	9.9%

Return for Risk

CGDV vs. FDVV — Risk / Return Rank

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

CGDV

CGDV Risk / Return Rank: 76
CGDV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 80
CGDV Sortino Ratio Rank: 78
CGDV Omega Ratio Rank: 80
CGDV Calmar Ratio Rank: 63
CGDV Martin Ratio Rank: 77

FDVV

FDVV Risk / Return Rank: 69
FDVV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 77
FDVV Sortino Ratio Rank: 77
FDVV Omega Ratio Rank: 77
FDVV Calmar Ratio Rank: 52
FDVV Martin Ratio Rank: 61

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. FDVV - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Capital Group Dividend Value ETF (CGDV) and Fidelity High Dividend ETF (FDVV). 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	FDVV	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.34	2.27	+0.08
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.20	3.15	+0.05
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.44	1.42	+0.02
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.93	2.47	+0.46
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	13.67	10.23	+3.44

CGDV vs. FDVV - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CGDV Sharpe Ratio is 2.34, which is comparable to the FDVV Sharpe Ratio of 2.27. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CGDV and FDVV, 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. FDVV - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CGDV drawdown since its inception was -21.82%, smaller than the maximum FDVV drawdown of -40.25%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CGDV and FDVV.

Drawdown Indicators

	CGDV	FDVV	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-21.82%	-40.25%	+18.43%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-9.75%	-9.30%	-0.45%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-14.28%	-15.90%	+1.62%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-20.18%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.48%	-1.49%	+0.01%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.59%	-3.79%	+0.20%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.09%	2.24%	-0.15%

Volatility

CGDV vs. FDVV - Volatility Comparison

Capital Group Dividend Value ETF (CGDV) has a higher volatility of 4.56% compared to Fidelity High Dividend ETF (FDVV) at 3.23%. This indicates that CGDV's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FDVV based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	CGDV	FDVV	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.56%	3.23%	+1.33%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	9.90%	8.28%	+1.62%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	12.23%	10.17%	+2.06%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	15.58%	14.77%	+0.81%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	15.58%	16.98%	-1.40%

CGDV vs. FDVV - Expense Ratio Comparison

CGDV has a 0.33% expense ratio, which is higher than FDVV's 0.29% expense ratio.

Dividends

CGDV vs. FDVV - Dividend Comparison

CGDV's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.17%, less than FDVV's 2.72% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016
CGDV Capital Group Dividend Value ETF	1.17%	1.29%	1.60%	1.65%	1.36%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
FDVV Fidelity High Dividend ETF	2.72%	2.89%	2.94%	3.77%	3.44%	2.70%	3.19%	3.93%	4.05%	3.66%	1.04%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CGDV and FDVV in my portfolio?

CGDV and FDVV have a correlation of 0.81, 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 FDVV?

CGDV has higher volatility (4.56%) compared to FDVV (3.23%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CGDV dropped -21.82% vs FDVV's -40.25%.

Which ETF is better, CGDV or FDVV?

On 3-year performance, CGDV leads with 23.66% vs 18.83% for FDVV. On fees, FDVV is cheaper at 0.29% per year. On volatility, FDVV has been the lower-risk option at 3.23%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, CGDV or FDVV?

Over the 3-year period, CGDV has performed better with a 23.66% return vs 18.83%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, CGDV or FDVV?

FDVV is cheaper with a 0.29% expense ratio, compared with 0.33% for CGDV.

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

FDVV has the higher dividend yield at 2.72%, compared with 1.17% for CGDV.

What is the main difference between CGDV and FDVV?

CGDV is categorized as Large Cap Value Equities, while FDVV is Large Cap Blend Equities. They also come from different issuers: Capital Group and Fidelity. Their fees differ too: 0.33% for CGDV and 0.29% for FDVV.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

CGDV currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.34 vs 2.27), 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.