CGGO vs. ACWI

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

CGGO (Capital Group Global Growth Equity ETF) and ACWI (iShares MSCI ACWI ETF) are both Global Equities funds. CGGO is actively managed, while ACWI is passively managed. Over the past 3 years, CGGO returned 21.81%/yr vs 21.15%/yr for ACWI. With a 0.96 correlation, they move nearly in lockstep. CGGO charges 0.47%/yr vs 0.32%/yr for ACWI.

Performance

CGGO vs. ACWI - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Capital Group Global Growth Equity ETF (CGGO) and iShares MSCI ACWI ETF (ACWI). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CGGO achieves a 19.37% return, which is significantly higher than ACWI's 12.13% return.

CGGO

• 1D: -0.82%
• 1M: 9.97%
• YTD: 19.37%
• 6M: 20.83%
• 1Y: 37.51%
• 3Y*: 21.81%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

ACWI

• 1D: -0.83%
• 1M: 5.28%
• YTD: 12.13%
• 6M: 12.96%
• 1Y: 29.18%
• 3Y*: 21.15%
• 5Y*: 11.28%
• 10Y*: 12.85%

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

CGGO vs. ACWI - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
CGGO Capital Group Global Growth Equity ETF	19.37%	21.08%	14.80%	23.43%	-13.12%
ACWI iShares MSCI ACWI ETF	12.13%	22.41%	17.45%	22.27%	-10.47%

Correlation

The correlation between CGGO and ACWI is 0.94, 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	0.94
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.94
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 25, 2022	0.96

The correlation between CGGO and ACWI has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.94 to 0.96 - a consistent structural relationship.

CGGO vs. ACWI - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	CGGO	ACWI
Technology	37.3%	29.4%
Industrials	14.0%	10.9%
Financial Services	10.7%	16.1%
Consumer Cyclical	10.2%	9.3%
Communication Services	8.1%	9.0%
Healthcare	5.4%	8.1%
Consumer Defensive	4.8%	5.0%
Basic Materials	4.4%	3.7%
Energy	1.4%	4.2%
Utilities	1.3%	2.6%
Real Estate	-	1.8%

Return for Risk

CGGO vs. ACWI — Risk / Return Rank

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

CGGO

CGGO Risk / Return Rank: 65
CGGO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 67
CGGO Sortino Ratio Rank: 65
CGGO Omega Ratio Rank: 66
CGGO Calmar Ratio Rank: 57
CGGO Martin Ratio Rank: 69

ACWI

ACWI Risk / Return Rank: 66
ACWI Sharpe Ratio Rank: 68
ACWI Sortino Ratio Rank: 67
ACWI Omega Ratio Rank: 67
ACWI Calmar Ratio Rank: 59
ACWI Martin Ratio Rank: 71

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.

CGGO vs. ACWI - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Capital Group Global Growth Equity ETF (CGGO) and iShares MSCI ACWI ETF (ACWI). 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.

	CGGO	ACWI	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	2.25	2.29	-0.04
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	3.08	3.17	-0.09
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.40	1.41	-0.01
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.87	3.01	-0.15
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	13.04	13.53	-0.49
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

CGGO vs. ACWI - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CGGO Sharpe Ratio is 2.25, which is comparable to the ACWI Sharpe Ratio of 2.29. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CGGO and ACWI, 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

	CGGO	ACWI	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.25	2.29	-0.04
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.71	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	0.75	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.78	0.43	+0.36

Drawdowns

CGGO vs. ACWI - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CGGO drawdown since its inception was -24.90%, smaller than the maximum ACWI drawdown of -56.00%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CGGO and ACWI.

Drawdown Indicators

	CGGO	ACWI	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-24.90%	-56.00%	+31.10%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-13.15%	-9.73%	-3.42%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-17.93%	-16.55%	-1.38%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-26.42%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-33.53%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.82%	-0.83%	+0.01%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-5.50%	-8.61%	+3.11%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.88%	2.16%	+0.72%

Volatility

CGGO vs. ACWI - Volatility Comparison

Capital Group Global Growth Equity ETF (CGGO) has a higher volatility of 6.68% compared to iShares MSCI ACWI ETF (ACWI) at 3.93%. This indicates that CGGO's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than ACWI based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	CGGO	ACWI	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.68%	3.93%	+2.75%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	14.40%	10.29%	+4.11%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	16.77%	12.78%	+3.99%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	18.56%	16.05%	+2.51%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	18.56%	17.11%	+1.45%

CGGO vs. ACWI - Expense Ratio Comparison

CGGO has a 0.47% expense ratio, which is higher than ACWI's 0.32% expense ratio.

Dividends

CGGO vs. ACWI - Dividend Comparison

CGGO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.70%, more than ACWI's 1.38% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
ACWI iShares MSCI ACWI ETF	1.38%	1.55%	1.70%	1.88%	1.79%	1.71%	1.43%	2.33%	2.18%	1.94%	2.19%	2.56%
CGGO Capital Group Global Growth Equity ETF	1.70%	2.03%	1.10%	0.76%	0.59%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CGGO and ACWI in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.94, CGGO and ACWI move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

Which is riskier, CGGO or ACWI?

CGGO has higher volatility (6.68%) compared to ACWI (3.93%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CGGO dropped -24.90% vs ACWI's -56.00%.

Which ETF is better, CGGO or ACWI?

On 3-year performance, CGGO leads with 21.81% vs 21.15% for ACWI. On fees, ACWI is cheaper at 0.32% per year. On volatility, ACWI has been the lower-risk option at 3.93%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, CGGO or ACWI?

Over the 3-year period, CGGO has performed better with a 21.81% return vs 21.15%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, CGGO or ACWI?

ACWI is cheaper with a 0.32% expense ratio, compared with 0.47% for CGGO.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, CGGO or ACWI?

CGGO has the higher dividend yield at 1.70%, compared with 1.38% for ACWI.

What is the main difference between CGGO and ACWI?

They also come from different issuers: Capital Group and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.47% for CGGO and 0.32% for ACWI.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

ACWI currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.29 vs 2.25), 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.