CGMS vs. SOFR
CGMS (Capital Group U.S. Multi-Sector Income ETF) and SOFR (Amplify Samsung SOFR ETF) are both Multisector Bonds funds. CGMS is actively managed, while SOFR is passively managed. Over the past year, CGMS returned 7.10% vs 3.90% for SOFR. At a 0.02 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. CGMS charges 0.39%/yr vs 0.20%/yr for SOFR.
Performance
CGMS vs. SOFR - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, CGMS achieves a 1.54% return, which is significantly higher than SOFR's 1.45% return.
CGMS
- 1D
- -0.25%
- 1M
- 0.56%
- YTD
- 1.54%
- 6M
- 1.68%
- 1Y
- 7.10%
- 3Y*
- 7.92%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
SOFR
- 1D
- 0.00%
- 1M
- 0.25%
- YTD
- 1.45%
- 6M
- 1.76%
- 1Y
- 3.90%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
CGMS vs. SOFR - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | |
|---|---|---|---|
CGMS Capital Group U.S. Multi-Sector Income ETF | 1.54% | 7.52% | -0.21% |
SOFR Amplify Samsung SOFR ETF | 1.45% | 4.27% | 1.20% |
Correlation
The correlation between CGMS and SOFR is -0.04, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | -0.04 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 27, 2024 | 0.02 |
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
CGMS vs. SOFR — Risk / Return Rank
CGMS
SOFR
CGMS vs. SOFR - 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 Amplify Samsung SOFR ETF (SOFR). 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 | SOFR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -2.58 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -3.72 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.39 | 3.35 | -1.96 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.88 | 9.64 | -6.76 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 12.89 | 39.82 | -26.93 |
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
| CGMS | SOFR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.08 | 4.66 | -2.58 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 1.66 | 4.96 | -3.30 |
Drawdowns
CGMS vs. SOFR - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CGMS drawdown since its inception was -4.08%, which is greater than SOFR's maximum drawdown of -0.41%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CGMS and SOFR.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| CGMS | SOFR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -4.08% | -0.41% | -3.67% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -2.47% | -0.41% | -2.06% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -4.08% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.25% | -0.14% | -0.11% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -0.67% | -0.03% | -0.64% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 0.55% | 0.10% | +0.45% |
Volatility
CGMS vs. SOFR - Volatility Comparison
Capital Group U.S. Multi-Sector Income ETF (CGMS) has a higher volatility of 1.15% compared to Amplify Samsung SOFR ETF (SOFR) at 0.24%. This indicates that CGMS's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than SOFR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| CGMS | SOFR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 1.15% | 0.24% | +0.91% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 2.66% | 0.55% | +2.11% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 3.43% | 0.84% | +2.59% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 5.13% | 0.84% | +4.29% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 5.13% | 0.84% | +4.29% |
CGMS vs. SOFR - Expense Ratio Comparison
CGMS has a 0.39% expense ratio, which is higher than SOFR's 0.20% expense ratio.
Dividends
CGMS vs. SOFR - Dividend Comparison
CGMS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 6.09%, more than SOFR's 3.95% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CGMS Capital Group U.S. Multi-Sector Income ETF | 6.09% | 6.00% | 5.91% | 5.84% | 0.97% |
SOFR Amplify Samsung SOFR ETF | 3.95% | 4.22% | 1.60% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
CGMS and SOFR have a correlation of -0.04, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
CGMS has higher volatility (1.15%) compared to SOFR (0.24%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CGMS dropped -4.08% vs SOFR's -0.41%.
On 1-year performance, CGMS leads with 7.10% vs 3.90% for SOFR. On fees, SOFR is cheaper at 0.20% per year. On volatility, SOFR has been the lower-risk option at 0.24%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, CGMS has performed better with a 7.10% return vs 3.90%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
SOFR is cheaper with a 0.20% expense ratio, compared with 0.39% for CGMS.
CGMS has the higher dividend yield at 6.09%, compared with 3.95% for SOFR.
They also come from different issuers: Capital Group and Amplify. Their fees differ too: 0.39% for CGMS and 0.20% for SOFR.
SOFR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (4.66 vs 2.08), 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.
Find the right allocation for CGMS and SOFR
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