CGNG vs. EMDV

Last updated Aug 4, 2026

CGNG (Capital Group New Geography Equity ETF) and EMDV (ProShares MSCI Emerging Markets Dividend Growers ETF) are both Emerging Markets Equities funds. CGNG is actively managed, while EMDV is passively managed. Over the past year, CGNG returned 27.86% vs 6.81% for EMDV. Their 0.68 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. CGNG charges 0.64%/yr vs 0.60%/yr for EMDV.

Performance

CGNG vs. EMDV - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Capital Group New Geography Equity ETF (CGNG) and ProShares MSCI Emerging Markets Dividend Growers ETF (EMDV). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CGNG achieves a 12.68% return, which is significantly higher than EMDV's 2.19% return.

CGNG

• 1D: 0.87%
• 1M: -0.47%
• 6M: 6.01%
• YTD: 12.68%
• 1Y: 27.86%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 19.17%

EMDV

• 1D: 0.66%
• 1M: 4.99%
• 6M: 0.40%
• YTD: 2.19%
• 1Y: 6.81%
• 3Y*: 2.30%
• 5Y*: -1.67%
• 10Y*: 1.83%
• ALL TIME*: 4.08%

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
CGNG Capital Group New Geography Equity ETF	$26.97M	$26.18M	$26.21M
EMDV ProShares MSCI Emerging Markets Dividend Growers ETF	$3.02K	$6.25K	$10.42K

CGNG vs. EMDV - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
CGNG Capital Group New Geography Equity ETF	12.68%	29.78%	-1.17%
EMDV ProShares MSCI Emerging Markets Dividend Growers ETF	2.19%	11.90%	1.54%

Correlation

The correlation between CGNG and EMDV is 0.67, which is moderate. They have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently, sharing some price drivers without tracking each other closely.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.67
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 27, 2024	0.68

The correlation between CGNG and EMDV has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.67 to 0.68 - a consistent structural relationship.

CGNG vs. EMDV - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	CGNG	EMDV
Technology	37.8%	22.8%
Financial Services	15.3%	24.0%
Industrials	10.4%	6.7%
Communication Services	9.4%	5.8%
Consumer Cyclical	8.0%	6.7%
Basic Materials	7.1%	2.5%
Healthcare	4.0%	8.4%
Consumer Defensive	3.2%	14.4%
Energy	2.2%	-
Utilities	1.6%	8.8%
Real Estate	1.1%	-

Return for Risk

CGNG vs. EMDV — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

CGNG

CGNG Risk / Return Rank: 53
CGNG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 50
CGNG Sortino Ratio Rank: 49
CGNG Omega Ratio Rank: 52
CGNG Calmar Ratio Rank: 55
CGNG Martin Ratio Rank: 58

EMDV

EMDV Risk / Return Rank: 26
EMDV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 25
EMDV Sortino Ratio Rank: 24
EMDV Omega Ratio Rank: 24
EMDV Calmar Ratio Rank: 29
EMDV Martin Ratio Rank: 27

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

CGNG vs. EMDV - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Capital Group New Geography Equity ETF (CGNG) and ProShares MSCI Emerging Markets Dividend Growers ETF (EMDV). 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.

	CGNG	EMDV	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.29	0.59	+0.71
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.84	0.90	+0.94
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.25	1.11	+0.13
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.04	0.94	+1.09
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	7.22	2.24	+4.98

CGNG vs. EMDV - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CGNG Sharpe Ratio is 1.29, which is higher than the EMDV Sharpe Ratio of 0.59. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CGNG and EMDV, 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

CGNG vs. EMDV - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CGNG drawdown since its inception was -15.90%, smaller than the maximum EMDV drawdown of -39.20%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CGNG and EMDV.

Drawdown Indicators

	CGNG	EMDV	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-15.90%	-39.20%	+23.30%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-13.75%	-7.24%	-6.51%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-20.71%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-33.37%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-39.20%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-5.59%	-13.94%	+8.35%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.99%	-13.59%	+10.60%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.87%	3.04%	+0.83%

Volatility

CGNG vs. EMDV - Volatility Comparison

Capital Group New Geography Equity ETF (CGNG) has a higher volatility of 7.72% compared to ProShares MSCI Emerging Markets Dividend Growers ETF (EMDV) at 3.09%. This indicates that CGNG's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than EMDV based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	CGNG	EMDV	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	7.72%	3.09%	+4.63%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	19.61%	9.92%	+9.69%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	21.67%	11.68%	+9.99%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	19.54%	15.42%	+4.12%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	19.54%	17.99%	+1.55%

CGNG vs. EMDV - Expense Ratio Comparison

CGNG has a 0.64% expense ratio, which is higher than EMDV's 0.60% expense ratio.

Dividends

CGNG vs. EMDV - Dividend Comparison

CGNG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.60%, less than EMDV's 1.89% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016
CGNG Capital Group New Geography Equity ETF	0.60%	0.68%	0.27%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
EMDV ProShares MSCI Emerging Markets Dividend Growers ETF	1.89%	2.46%	2.79%	1.88%	3.68%	2.12%	3.12%	2.38%	1.27%	2.09%	2.87%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CGNG and EMDV in my portfolio?

CGNG and EMDV have a correlation of 0.67, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, CGNG or EMDV?

CGNG has higher volatility (7.72%) compared to EMDV (3.09%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CGNG dropped -15.90% vs EMDV's -39.20%.

Which ETF is better, CGNG or EMDV?

On 1-year performance, CGNG leads with 27.86% vs 6.81% for EMDV. On fees, EMDV is cheaper at 0.60% per year. On volatility, EMDV has been the lower-risk option at 3.09%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, CGNG or EMDV?

Over the 1-year period, CGNG has performed better with a 27.86% return vs 6.81%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, CGNG or EMDV?

EMDV is cheaper with a 0.60% expense ratio, compared with 0.64% for CGNG.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, CGNG or EMDV?

EMDV has the higher dividend yield at 1.89%, compared with 0.60% for CGNG.

What is the main difference between CGNG and EMDV?

They also come from different issuers: Capital Group and ProShares. Their fees differ too: 0.64% for CGNG and 0.60% for EMDV.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

CGNG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.29 vs 0.59), 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.