CGMS vs. AINP

Last updated Apr 1, 2026

Compare and contrast key facts about Capital Group U.S. Multi-Sector Income ETF (CGMS) and Allspring Income Plus ETF (AINP).

CGMS and AINP are both exchange-traded funds (ETFs), meaning they are traded on stock exchanges and can be bought and sold throughout the day. CGMS is an actively managed fund by Capital Group. It was launched on Oct 25, 2022. AINP is an actively managed fund by Allspring. It was launched on Dec 4, 2024.

Performance

CGMS vs. AINP - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Capital Group U.S. Multi-Sector Income ETF (CGMS) and Allspring Income Plus ETF (AINP). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

CGMS vs. AINP - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
CGMS Capital Group U.S. Multi-Sector Income ETF	-0.24%	7.52%	-0.78%
AINP Allspring Income Plus ETF	-0.35%	7.53%	-1.24%

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CGMS achieves a -0.24% return, which is significantly higher than AINP's -0.35% return.

CGMS

• 1D: 0.78%
• 1M: -1.23%
• YTD: -0.24%
• 6M: 0.95%
• 1Y: 5.78%
• 3Y*: 7.33%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

AINP

• 1D: 0.62%
• 1M: -1.56%
• YTD: -0.35%
• 6M: 0.96%
• 1Y: 4.89%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

CGMS vs. AINP - Expense Ratio Comparison

CGMS has a 0.39% expense ratio, which is higher than AINP's 0.36% expense ratio.

CGMS

Capital Group U.S. Multi-Sector Income ETF

AINP

Allspring Income Plus ETF

Return for Risk

CGMS vs. AINP — Risk / Return Rank

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

CGMS

CGMS Risk / Return Rank: 72
CGMS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 75
CGMS Sortino Ratio Rank: 74
CGMS Omega Ratio Rank: 74
CGMS Calmar Ratio Rank: 65
CGMS Martin Ratio Rank: 71

AINP

AINP Risk / Return Rank: 71
AINP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 71
AINP Sortino Ratio Rank: 72
AINP Omega Ratio Rank: 69
AINP Calmar Ratio Rank: 74
AINP 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.

CGMS vs. AINP - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Capital Group U.S. Multi-Sector Income ETF (CGMS) and Allspring Income Plus ETF (AINP). 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.

	CGMS	AINP	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	1.31	1.30	+0.01
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	1.82	1.87	-0.05
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.27	1.26	+0.01
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.58	2.01	-0.43
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	6.94	7.55	-0.61
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

CGMS vs. AINP - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CGMS Sharpe Ratio is 1.31, which is comparable to the AINP Sharpe Ratio of 1.30. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CGMS and AINP, offering insights into how both investments have performed under varying market conditions. These values are calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	CGMS	AINP	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.31	1.30	+0.01
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.62	1.23	+0.39

Correlation

The correlation between CGMS and AINP is 0.74, which is considered to be high. That indicates a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Having highly-correlated positions in a portfolio may signal a lack of diversification, potentially leading to increased risk during market downturns.

Dividends

CGMS vs. AINP - Dividend Comparison

CGMS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.95%, more than AINP's 5.50% yield.

	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022
CGMS Capital Group U.S. Multi-Sector Income ETF	5.95%	6.00%	5.91%	5.84%	0.97%
AINP Allspring Income Plus ETF	5.50%	5.03%	0.47%	0.00%	0.00%

Drawdowns

CGMS vs. AINP - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CGMS drawdown since its inception was -4.08%, which is greater than AINP's maximum drawdown of -2.61%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CGMS and AINP.

Drawdown Indicators

	CGMS	AINP	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-4.08%	-2.61%	-1.47%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-3.65%	-2.51%	-1.14%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.42%	-1.56%	+0.14%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.69%	-0.45%	-0.24%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.83%	0.70%	+0.13%

Volatility

CGMS vs. AINP - Volatility Comparison

Capital Group U.S. Multi-Sector Income ETF (CGMS) has a higher volatility of 1.93% compared to Allspring Income Plus ETF (AINP) at 1.56%. This indicates that CGMS's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than AINP based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	CGMS	AINP	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.93%	1.56%	+0.37%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	2.47%	2.22%	+0.25%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	4.44%	3.79%	+0.65%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	5.19%	3.63%	+1.56%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	5.19%	3.63%	+1.56%