CGRO vs. AEVA
CGRO (CoreValues Alpha Greater China Growth ETF) is China Equities fund actively managed by CoreValues Alpha, while AEVA (Aeva Technologies, Inc.) is a stock. Over the past year, CGRO returned -12.15% vs 18.85% for AEVA. At a 0.25 correlation, their price movements are largely independent.
Performance
CGRO vs. AEVA - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, CGRO achieves a -15.64% return, which is significantly lower than AEVA's 83.73% return.
CGRO
- 1D
- -0.69%
- 1M
- -6.61%
- YTD
- -15.64%
- 6M
- -16.66%
- 1Y
- -12.15%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
AEVA
- 1D
- -3.60%
- 1M
- 60.10%
- YTD
- 83.73%
- 6M
- 53.65%
- 1Y
- 18.85%
- 3Y*
- 53.85%
- 5Y*
- -14.04%
- 10Y*
- —
CGRO vs. AEVA - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
CGRO CoreValues Alpha Greater China Growth ETF | -15.64% | 20.23% | 14.75% | 2.03% |
AEVA Aeva Technologies, Inc. | 83.73% | 179.58% | 25.38% | 1.79% |
Correlation
The correlation between CGRO and AEVA is 0.25, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.25 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 18, 2023 | 0.25 |
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
CGRO vs. AEVA — Risk / Return Rank
CGRO
AEVA
CGRO vs. AEVA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for CoreValues Alpha Greater China Growth ETF (CGRO) and Aeva Technologies, Inc. (AEVA). 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.
| CGRO | AEVA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.71 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -1.76 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 0.93 | 1.13 | -0.20 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.44 | 0.25 | -0.69 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -0.83 | 0.34 | -1.17 |
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
| CGRO | AEVA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | -0.55 | 0.16 | -0.71 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | — | -0.15 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.23 | -0.12 | +0.35 |
Drawdowns
CGRO vs. AEVA - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CGRO drawdown since its inception was -27.90%, smaller than the maximum AEVA drawdown of -97.71%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CGRO and AEVA.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| CGRO | AEVA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -27.90% | -97.71% | +69.81% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -27.90% | -75.68% | +47.78% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -75.68% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -96.25% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -27.90% | -75.60% | +47.70% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -10.25% | -70.67% | +60.42% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 14.67% | 55.80% | -41.13% |
Volatility
CGRO vs. AEVA - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for CoreValues Alpha Greater China Growth ETF (CGRO) is 7.68%, while Aeva Technologies, Inc. (AEVA) has a volatility of 44.56%. This indicates that CGRO experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than AEVA based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| CGRO | AEVA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 7.68% | 44.56% | -36.88% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 15.54% | 82.91% | -67.37% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 22.47% | 115.13% | -92.66% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 28.97% | 97.13% | -68.16% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 28.97% | 91.37% | -62.40% |
Dividends
CGRO vs. AEVA - Dividend Comparison
CGRO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.32%, while AEVA has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
AEVA Aeva Technologies, Inc. | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
CGRO CoreValues Alpha Greater China Growth ETF | 3.32% | 2.48% | 2.47% | 0.21% |
Frequently Asked Questions
CGRO and AEVA have a correlation of 0.25, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
AEVA has higher volatility (44.56%) compared to CGRO (7.68%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CGRO dropped -27.90% vs AEVA's -97.71%.
AEVA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.16 vs -0.55), 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 CGRO and AEVA
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