CGRO vs. DRGN

Last updated Aug 5, 2026

CGRO (CoreValues Alpha Greater China Growth ETF) and DRGN (Themes China Generative Artificial Intelligence ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - CGRO is a China Equities fund actively managed by CoreValues, while DRGN is a Artificial Intelligence fund tracking the BITA China Generative AI Select Index. CGRO is actively managed, while DRGN is passively managed. Over the past year, CGRO returned -12.21% vs 37.74% for DRGN. Their 0.62 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. CGRO charges 0.75%/yr vs 0.39%/yr for DRGN.

Performance

CGRO vs. DRGN - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in CoreValues Alpha Greater China Growth ETF (CGRO) and Themes China Generative Artificial Intelligence ETF (DRGN). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CGRO achieves a -12.97% return, which is significantly lower than DRGN's 13.71% return.

CGRO

• 1D: 0.75%
• 1M: 12.95%
• 6M: -10.76%
• YTD: -12.97%
• 1Y: -12.21%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 7.45%

DRGN

• 1D: 4.60%
• 1M: 4.46%
• 6M: 5.58%
• YTD: 13.71%
• 1Y: 37.74%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 41.66%

*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)
CGRO CoreValues Alpha Greater China Growth ETF	$6.01K	$9.52K	$35.25K
DRGN Themes China Generative Artificial Intelligence ETF	$473.92K	$435.90K	$560.91K

CGRO vs. DRGN - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
CGRO CoreValues Alpha Greater China Growth ETF	-12.97%	3.62%
DRGN Themes China Generative Artificial Intelligence ETF	13.71%	26.96%

Correlation

The correlation between CGRO and DRGN is 0.63, 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.	0.63
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 15, 2025	0.62

The correlation between CGRO and DRGN has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.62 to 0.63 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

CGRO vs. DRGN — Risk / Return Rank

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

CGRO

CGRO Risk / Return Rank: 5
CGRO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5
CGRO Sortino Ratio Rank: 5
CGRO Omega Ratio Rank: 5
CGRO Calmar Ratio Rank: 6
CGRO Martin Ratio Rank: 6

DRGN

DRGN Risk / Return Rank: 38
DRGN Sharpe Ratio Rank: 37
DRGN Sortino Ratio Rank: 38
DRGN Omega Ratio Rank: 36
DRGN Calmar Ratio Rank: 45
DRGN Martin Ratio Rank: 34

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.

CGRO vs. DRGN - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for CoreValues Alpha Greater China Growth ETF (CGRO) and Themes China Generative Artificial Intelligence ETF (DRGN). 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.

	CGRO	DRGN	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.53	1.03	-1.56
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-0.63	1.61	-2.24
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.93	1.19	-0.26
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.34	1.82	-2.15
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-0.63	3.61	-4.24

CGRO vs. DRGN - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CGRO Sharpe Ratio is -0.53, which is lower than the DRGN Sharpe Ratio of 1.03. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CGRO and DRGN, 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

CGRO vs. DRGN - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CGRO drawdown since its inception was -36.53%, which is greater than DRGN's maximum drawdown of -20.86%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CGRO and DRGN.

Drawdown Indicators

	CGRO	DRGN	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-36.53%	-20.86%	-15.67%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-36.53%	-20.86%	-15.67%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-25.62%	-9.32%	-16.30%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-11.47%	-8.41%	-3.06%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	19.35%	10.47%	+8.88%

Volatility

CGRO vs. DRGN - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for CoreValues Alpha Greater China Growth ETF (CGRO) is 6.15%, while Themes China Generative Artificial Intelligence ETF (DRGN) has a volatility of 12.67%. This indicates that CGRO experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than DRGN based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	CGRO	DRGN	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.15%	12.67%	-6.52%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	16.63%	26.15%	-9.52%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	23.09%	36.79%	-13.70%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	28.67%	36.16%	-7.49%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	28.67%	36.16%	-7.49%

CGRO vs. DRGN - Expense Ratio Comparison

CGRO has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is higher than DRGN's 0.39% expense ratio.

Dividends

CGRO vs. DRGN - Dividend Comparison

CGRO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.22%, more than DRGN's 1.07% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023
CGRO CoreValues Alpha Greater China Growth ETF	3.22%	2.48%	2.47%	0.21%
DRGN Themes China Generative Artificial Intelligence ETF	1.07%	1.22%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CGRO and DRGN in my portfolio?

CGRO and DRGN have a correlation of 0.63, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, CGRO or DRGN?

DRGN has higher volatility (12.67%) compared to CGRO (6.15%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CGRO dropped -36.53% vs DRGN's -20.86%.

Which ETF is better, CGRO or DRGN?

On 1-year performance, DRGN leads with 37.74% vs -12.21% for CGRO. On fees, DRGN is cheaper at 0.39% per year. On volatility, CGRO has been the lower-risk option at 6.15%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, CGRO or DRGN?

Over the 1-year period, DRGN has performed better with a 37.74% return vs -12.21%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, CGRO or DRGN?

DRGN is cheaper with a 0.39% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for CGRO.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, CGRO or DRGN?

CGRO has the higher dividend yield at 3.22%, compared with 1.07% for DRGN.

What is the main difference between CGRO and DRGN?

CGRO is categorized as China Equities, while DRGN is Artificial Intelligence. They also come from different issuers: CoreValues and Themes. Their fees differ too: 0.75% for CGRO and 0.39% for DRGN.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

DRGN currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.03 vs -0.53), 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.