CGIB vs. TMSF
CGIB (Capital Group International Bond ETF (USD-Hedged)) and TMSF (T. Rowe Price Multi-Sector Income ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - CGIB is a Global Bonds fund actively managed by Capital Group, while TMSF is a Multisector Bonds fund actively managed by T. Rowe Price. Both are actively managed. A 0.52 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. CGIB charges 0.45%/yr vs 0.37%/yr for TMSF.
Performance
CGIB vs. TMSF - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, CGIB achieves a 0.50% return, which is significantly lower than TMSF's 1.75% return.
CGIB
- 1D
- 0.12%
- 1M
- 0.60%
- YTD
- 0.50%
- 6M
- 0.27%
- 1Y
- 2.83%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
TMSF
- 1D
- 0.04%
- 1M
- 0.52%
- YTD
- 1.75%
- 6M
- 2.39%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
CGIB vs. TMSF - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
CGIB Capital Group International Bond ETF (USD-Hedged) | 0.50% | 0.11% |
TMSF T. Rowe Price Multi-Sector Income ETF | 1.75% | 1.29% |
Correlation
The correlation between CGIB and TMSF is 0.52, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 21, 2025 | 0.52 |
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
Return for Risk
CGIB vs. TMSF — Risk / Return Rank
CGIB
TMSF
CGIB vs. TMSF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Capital Group International Bond ETF (USD-Hedged) (CGIB) and T. Rowe Price Multi-Sector Income ETF (TMSF). 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.
| CGIB | TMSF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.13 | — | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.06 | — | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 2.70 | — | — |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| CGIB | TMSF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.71 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 1.09 | 2.01 | -0.93 |
Drawdowns
CGIB vs. TMSF - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CGIB drawdown since its inception was -2.68%, which is greater than TMSF's maximum drawdown of -2.28%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CGIB and TMSF.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| CGIB | TMSF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -2.68% | -2.28% | -0.40% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -2.68% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -1.10% | -0.21% | -0.89% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -0.70% | -0.38% | -0.32% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.05% | — | — |
Volatility
CGIB vs. TMSF - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| CGIB | TMSF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 1.43% | — | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 2.92% | — | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 3.98% | 2.93% | +1.05% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 3.76% | 2.93% | +0.83% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 3.76% | 2.93% | +0.83% |
CGIB vs. TMSF - Expense Ratio Comparison
CGIB has a 0.45% expense ratio, which is higher than TMSF's 0.37% expense ratio.
Dividends
CGIB vs. TMSF - Dividend Comparison
CGIB's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.26%, more than TMSF's 3.06% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 |
|---|---|---|---|
CGIB Capital Group International Bond ETF (USD-Hedged) | 4.26% | 4.26% | 1.65% |
TMSF T. Rowe Price Multi-Sector Income ETF | 3.06% | 0.75% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
CGIB and TMSF have a correlation of 0.52, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, TMSF is cheaper at 0.37% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
TMSF is cheaper with a 0.37% expense ratio, compared with 0.45% for CGIB.
CGIB has the higher dividend yield at 4.26%, compared with 3.06% for TMSF.
CGIB is categorized as Global Bonds, while TMSF is Multisector Bonds. They also come from different issuers: Capital Group and T. Rowe Price. Their fees differ too: 0.45% for CGIB and 0.37% for TMSF.
Find the right allocation for CGIB and TMSF
Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.
Open Portfolio Optimizer