CGMM vs. CGBL

Last updated Jun 25, 2026

CGMM (Capital Group U.S. Small and Mid Cap ETF) and CGBL (Capital Group Core Balanced ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - CGMM is a Mid Cap Blend Equities fund actively managed by Capital Group, while CGBL is a Allocation--50% to 70% Equity fund actively managed by Capital Group. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, CGMM returned 21.88% vs 15.83% for CGBL. Their correlation of 0.83 suggests significant overlap in exposure. CGMM charges 0.51%/yr vs 0.33%/yr for CGBL.

Performance

CGMM vs. CGBL - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Capital Group U.S. Small and Mid Cap ETF (CGMM) 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, CGMM achieves a 11.75% return, which is significantly higher than CGBL's 6.77% return.

CGMM

• 1D: 0.47%
• 1M: 2.09%
• YTD: 11.75%
• 6M: 9.41%
• 1Y: 21.88%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

CGBL

• 1D: 0.24%
• 1M: 1.24%
• YTD: 6.77%
• 6M: 5.97%
• 1Y: 15.83%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

CGMM vs. CGBL - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
CGMM Capital Group U.S. Small and Mid Cap ETF	11.75%	12.15%
CGBL Capital Group Core Balanced ETF	6.77%	14.67%

Correlation

The correlation between CGMM and CGBL 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 (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 16, 2025	0.83

The correlation between CGMM and CGBL has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.81 to 0.83 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

CGMM vs. CGBL — Risk / Return Rank

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

CGMM

CGMM Risk / Return Rank: 46
CGMM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 43
CGMM Sortino Ratio Rank: 44
CGMM Omega Ratio Rank: 39
CGMM Calmar Ratio Rank: 49
CGMM Martin Ratio Rank: 54

CGBL

CGBL Risk / Return Rank: 50
CGBL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 50
CGBL Sortino Ratio Rank: 51
CGBL Omega Ratio Rank: 49
CGBL Calmar Ratio Rank: 45
CGBL Martin Ratio Rank: 56

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.

CGMM vs. CGBL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Capital Group U.S. Small and Mid Cap ETF (CGMM) 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.

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.

	CGMM	CGBL	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.36	1.56	-0.20
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.00	2.25	-0.25
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.24	1.29	-0.05
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.18	2.02	+0.16
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	8.31	8.76	-0.45

CGMM vs. CGBL - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CGMM Sharpe Ratio is 1.36, which is comparable to the CGBL Sharpe Ratio of 1.56. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CGMM 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.

Drawdowns

CGMM vs. CGBL - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CGMM drawdown since its inception was -21.04%, which is greater than CGBL's maximum drawdown of -11.66%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CGMM and CGBL.

Drawdown Indicators

	CGMM	CGBL	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-21.04%	-11.66%	-9.38%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-10.09%	-7.88%	-2.21%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.49%	-1.26%	+0.77%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.16%	-1.29%	-1.87%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.64%	1.81%	+0.83%

Volatility

CGMM vs. CGBL - Volatility Comparison

Capital Group U.S. Small and Mid Cap ETF (CGMM) has a higher volatility of 4.69% compared to Capital Group Core Balanced ETF (CGBL) at 4.19%. This indicates that CGMM'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

	CGMM	CGBL	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.69%	4.19%	+0.50%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	12.18%	8.53%	+3.65%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	16.17%	10.23%	+5.94%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	20.20%	11.16%	+9.04%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	20.20%	11.16%	+9.04%

CGMM vs. CGBL - Expense Ratio Comparison

CGMM has a 0.51% expense ratio, which is higher than CGBL's 0.33% expense ratio.

Dividends

CGMM vs. CGBL - Dividend Comparison

CGMM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.36%, less than CGBL's 1.87% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023
CGBL Capital Group Core Balanced ETF	1.87%	1.98%	1.92%	0.48%
CGMM Capital Group U.S. Small and Mid Cap ETF	0.36%	0.40%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CGMM and CGBL in my portfolio?

CGMM and CGBL 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, CGMM or CGBL?

CGMM has higher volatility (4.69%) compared to CGBL (4.19%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CGMM dropped -21.04% vs CGBL's -11.66%.

Which ETF is better, CGMM or CGBL?

On 1-year performance, CGMM leads with 21.88% vs 15.83% for CGBL. On fees, CGBL is cheaper at 0.33% per year. On volatility, CGBL has been the lower-risk option at 4.19%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, CGMM or CGBL?

Over the 1-year period, CGMM has performed better with a 21.88% return vs 15.83%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, CGMM or CGBL?

CGBL is cheaper with a 0.33% expense ratio, compared with 0.51% for CGMM.

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

CGBL has the higher dividend yield at 1.87%, compared with 0.36% for CGMM.

What is the main difference between CGMM and CGBL?

CGMM is categorized as Mid Cap Blend Equities, while CGBL is Allocation--50% to 70% Equity. Their fees differ too: 0.51% for CGMM and 0.33% for CGBL.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

CGBL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.56 vs 1.36), 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.