CGGO vs. FWD

Last updated Jun 25, 2026

CGGO (Capital Group Global Growth Equity ETF) and FWD (AB Disruptors ETF) are both Global Equities funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past 3 years, CGGO returned 21.36%/yr vs 37.60%/yr for FWD. Their correlation of 0.89 suggests significant overlap in exposure. CGGO charges 0.47%/yr vs 0.65%/yr for FWD.

Performance

CGGO vs. FWD - Performance Comparison

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CGGO achieves a 18.47% return, which is significantly lower than FWD's 35.20% return.

CGGO

• 1D: 0.42%
• 1M: 4.29%
• YTD: 18.47%
• 6M: 17.68%
• 1Y: 32.98%
• 3Y*: 21.36%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

FWD

• 1D: -0.29%
• 1M: 3.15%
• YTD: 35.20%
• 6M: 32.48%
• 1Y: 62.07%
• 3Y*: 37.60%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

CGGO vs. FWD - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
CGGO Capital Group Global Growth Equity ETF	18.47%	21.08%	14.80%	15.72%
FWD AB Disruptors ETF	35.20%	32.00%	29.23%	23.48%

Correlation

The correlation between CGGO and FWD 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 (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.90
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 22, 2023	0.89

The correlation between CGGO and FWD has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.89 to 0.90 - a consistent structural relationship.

CGGO vs. FWD - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	CGGO	FWD
Technology	40.3%	59.8%
Industrials	13.6%	19.3%
Financial Services	9.7%	0.5%
Consumer Cyclical	9.2%	3.6%
Healthcare	8.6%	6.9%
Communication Services	7.1%	3.4%
Consumer Defensive	4.0%	0.8%
Basic Materials	3.2%	1.9%
Energy	1.7%	2.6%
Utilities	0.8%	0.3%
Real Estate	-	0.7%

Return for Risk

CGGO vs. FWD — Risk / Return Rank

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

CGGO

CGGO Risk / Return Rank: 60
CGGO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 59
CGGO Sortino Ratio Rank: 56
CGGO Omega Ratio Rank: 60
CGGO Calmar Ratio Rank: 57
CGGO Martin Ratio Rank: 67

FWD

FWD Risk / Return Rank: 81
FWD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 82
FWD Sortino Ratio Rank: 72
FWD Omega Ratio Rank: 74
FWD Calmar Ratio Rank: 89
FWD Martin Ratio Rank: 86

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. FWD - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Capital Group Global Growth Equity ETF (CGGO) and AB Disruptors ETF (FWD). 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.

	CGGO	FWD	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.76	2.34	-0.58
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.40	2.87	-0.47
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.33	1.39	-0.06
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.52	4.79	-2.27
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	11.05	16.19	-5.14

CGGO vs. FWD - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CGGO Sharpe Ratio is 1.76, which is comparable to the FWD Sharpe Ratio of 2.34. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CGGO and FWD, 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

CGGO vs. FWD - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CGGO drawdown since its inception was -24.90%, smaller than the maximum FWD drawdown of -29.02%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CGGO and FWD.

Drawdown Indicators

	CGGO	FWD	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-24.90%	-29.02%	+4.12%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-13.15%	-13.03%	-0.12%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-17.93%	-29.02%	+11.09%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-3.62%	-5.16%	+1.54%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-5.45%	-4.06%	-1.39%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.99%	3.85%	-0.86%

Volatility

CGGO vs. FWD - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Capital Group Global Growth Equity ETF (CGGO) is 9.80%, while AB Disruptors ETF (FWD) has a volatility of 12.85%. This indicates that CGGO experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FWD based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	CGGO	FWD	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	9.80%	12.85%	-3.05%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	16.78%	21.80%	-5.02%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	18.88%	26.73%	-7.85%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	18.99%	25.37%	-6.38%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	18.99%	25.37%	-6.38%

CGGO vs. FWD - Expense Ratio Comparison

CGGO has a 0.47% expense ratio, which is lower than FWD's 0.65% expense ratio.

Dividends

CGGO vs. FWD - Dividend Comparison

CGGO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.71%, more than FWD's 0.08% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022
CGGO Capital Group Global Growth Equity ETF	1.71%	2.03%	1.10%	0.76%	0.59%
FWD AB Disruptors ETF	0.08%	0.11%	1.89%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CGGO and FWD in my portfolio?

CGGO and FWD 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, CGGO or FWD?

FWD has higher volatility (12.85%) compared to CGGO (9.80%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CGGO dropped -24.90% vs FWD's -29.02%.

Which ETF is better, CGGO or FWD?

On 3-year performance, FWD leads with 37.60% vs 21.36% for CGGO. On fees, CGGO is cheaper at 0.47% per year. On volatility, CGGO has been the lower-risk option at 9.80%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, CGGO or FWD?

Over the 3-year period, FWD has performed better with a 37.60% return vs 21.36%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, CGGO or FWD?

CGGO is cheaper with a 0.47% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for FWD.

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

CGGO has the higher dividend yield at 1.71%, compared with 0.08% for FWD.

What is the main difference between CGGO and FWD?

They also come from different issuers: Capital Group and AllianceBernstein. Their fees differ too: 0.47% for CGGO and 0.65% for FWD.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FWD currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.34 vs 1.76), 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.