CGGR vs. CGBL

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

CGGR (Capital Group Growth ETF) and CGBL (Capital Group Core Balanced ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - CGGR is a Large Cap Growth 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, CGGR returned 21.70% vs 18.31% for CGBL. Their correlation of 0.89 suggests significant overlap in exposure. CGGR charges 0.39%/yr vs 0.33%/yr for CGBL.

Performance

CGGR vs. CGBL - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Capital Group Growth ETF (CGGR) 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, CGGR achieves a 6.16% return, which is significantly lower than CGBL's 7.54% return.

CGGR

• 1D: -0.13%
• 1M: 4.56%
• YTD: 6.16%
• 6M: 6.29%
• 1Y: 21.70%
• 3Y*: 25.62%
• 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)

CGGR vs. CGBL - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
CGGR Capital Group Growth ETF	6.16%	19.75%	32.12%	15.19%
CGBL Capital Group Core Balanced ETF	7.54%	15.33%	16.64%	9.80%

Correlation

The correlation between CGGR and CGBL is 0.88, 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	0.88
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 29, 2023	0.89

The correlation between CGGR and CGBL has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.88 to 0.89 - a consistent structural relationship.

CGGR vs. CGBL - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	CGGR	CGBL
Technology	37.9%	29.9%
Communication Services	16.9%	8.4%
Consumer Cyclical	13.0%	8.7%
Healthcare	9.2%	8.9%
Industrials	7.5%	16.6%
Financial Services	5.2%	11.8%
Basic Materials	2.3%	7.2%
Energy	2.2%	2.0%
Consumer Defensive	2.1%	4.2%
Utilities	0.9%	2.5%
Real Estate	0.8%	0.0%

Return for Risk

CGGR vs. CGBL — Risk / Return Rank

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

CGGR

CGGR Risk / Return Rank: 36
CGGR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 38
CGGR Sortino Ratio Rank: 37
CGGR Omega Ratio Rank: 38
CGGR Calmar Ratio Rank: 30
CGGR Martin Ratio Rank: 36

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.

CGGR vs. CGBL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Capital Group Growth ETF (CGGR) 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.

	CGGR	CGBL	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.34	1.92	-0.57
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.88	2.78	-0.90
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.24	1.35	-0.11
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.44	2.33	-0.89
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	5.31	10.36	-5.05
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

CGGR vs. CGBL - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CGGR Sharpe Ratio is 1.34, which is comparable to the CGBL Sharpe Ratio of 1.92. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CGGR 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

	CGGR	CGBL	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.34	1.92	-0.57
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.78	1.72	-0.94

Drawdowns

CGGR vs. CGBL - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CGGR drawdown since its inception was -28.90%, which is greater than CGBL's maximum drawdown of -11.66%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CGGR and CGBL.

Drawdown Indicators

	CGGR	CGBL	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-28.90%	-11.66%	-17.24%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-15.13%	-7.88%	-7.25%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-23.37%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.17%	-0.53%	-0.64%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-7.72%	-1.29%	-6.43%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.10%	1.77%	+2.33%

Volatility

CGGR vs. CGBL - Volatility Comparison

Capital Group Growth ETF (CGGR) has a higher volatility of 4.17% compared to Capital Group Core Balanced ETF (CGBL) at 3.10%. This indicates that CGGR's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CGBL based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	CGGR	CGBL	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.17%	3.10%	+1.07%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	12.40%	7.84%	+4.56%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	16.24%	9.60%	+6.64%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	21.77%	11.02%	+10.75%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	21.77%	11.02%	+10.75%

CGGR vs. CGBL - Expense Ratio Comparison

CGGR has a 0.39% expense ratio, which is higher than CGBL's 0.33% expense ratio.

Dividends

CGGR vs. CGBL - Dividend Comparison

CGGR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.09%, 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%
CGGR Capital Group Growth ETF	0.09%	0.10%	0.33%	0.40%	0.33%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CGGR and CGBL in my portfolio?

CGGR and CGBL have a correlation of 0.88, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, CGGR or CGBL?

CGGR has higher volatility (4.17%) compared to CGBL (3.10%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CGGR dropped -28.90% vs CGBL's -11.66%.

Which ETF is better, CGGR or CGBL?

On 1-year performance, CGGR leads with 21.70% vs 18.31% for CGBL. On fees, CGBL is cheaper at 0.33% per year. On volatility, CGBL has been the lower-risk option at 3.10%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, CGGR or CGBL?

Over the 1-year period, CGGR has performed better with a 21.70% return vs 18.31%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, CGGR or CGBL?

CGBL is cheaper with a 0.33% expense ratio, compared with 0.39% for CGGR.

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

CGBL has the higher dividend yield at 1.85%, compared with 0.09% for CGGR.

What is the main difference between CGGR and CGBL?

CGGR is categorized as Large Cap Growth Equities, while CGBL is Diversified Portfolio. Their fees differ too: 0.39% for CGGR and 0.33% for CGBL.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

CGBL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.92 vs 1.34), 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.