CGRO vs. ONLN
CGRO (CoreValues Alpha Greater China Growth ETF) and ONLN (ProShares Online Retail ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - CGRO is a China Equities fund actively managed by CoreValues Alpha, while ONLN is a Consumer Discretionary Equities fund tracking the ProShares Online Retail Index. CGRO is actively managed, while ONLN is passively managed. Over the past year, CGRO returned -16.82% vs 13.31% for ONLN. A 0.56 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. CGRO charges 0.75%/yr vs 0.58%/yr for ONLN.
Performance
CGRO vs. ONLN - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, CGRO achieves a -17.76% return, which is significantly lower than ONLN's -0.78% return.
CGRO
- 1D
- 2.43%
- 1M
- 0.27%
- 6M
- -20.41%
- YTD
- -17.76%
- 1Y
- -16.82%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
ONLN
- 1D
- 2.32%
- 1M
- 5.83%
- 6M
- -6.02%
- YTD
- -0.78%
- 1Y
- 13.31%
- 3Y*
- 19.62%
- 5Y*
- -5.15%
- 10Y*
- —
CGRO vs. ONLN - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
CGRO CoreValues Alpha Greater China Growth ETF | -17.76% | 20.23% | 14.75% | 1.84% |
ONLN ProShares Online Retail ETF | -0.78% | 33.03% | 24.85% | 15.99% |
Correlation
The correlation between CGRO and ONLN is 0.54, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.54 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 17, 2023 | 0.56 |
The correlation between CGRO and ONLN has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.54 to 0.56 - a consistent structural relationship.
CGRO vs. ONLN - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
CGRO
ONLN
Consumer Cyclical
Technology
Industrials
-
Communication Services
-
Healthcare
-
Financial Services
-
Consumer Defensive
Real Estate
-
Basic Materials
-
-
Energy
-
-
Utilities
-
-
Consumer Cyclical
CGRO
ONLN
Technology
CGRO
ONLN
Industrials
CGRO
ONLN
-
Communication Services
CGRO
ONLN
-
Healthcare
CGRO
ONLN
-
Financial Services
CGRO
ONLN
-
Consumer Defensive
CGRO
ONLN
Real Estate
CGRO
ONLN
-
Basic Materials
CGRO
-
ONLN
-
Energy
CGRO
-
ONLN
-
Utilities
CGRO
-
ONLN
-
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. ONLN — Risk / Return Rank
CGRO
ONLN
CGRO vs. ONLN - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for CoreValues Alpha Greater China Growth ETF (CGRO) and ProShares Online Retail ETF (ONLN). 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 | ONLN | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -1.28 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -1.85 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 0.89 | 1.10 | -0.21 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.46 | 0.68 | -1.14 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -0.93 | 1.51 | -2.44 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
CGRO vs. ONLN - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CGRO drawdown since its inception was -36.53%, smaller than the maximum ONLN drawdown of -71.77%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CGRO and ONLN.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| CGRO | ONLN | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -36.53% | -71.77% | +35.24% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -36.53% | -19.75% | -16.78% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -27.97% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -66.97% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -29.71% | -35.76% | +6.05% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -11.11% | -35.47% | +24.36% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 18.10% | 8.85% | +9.25% |
Volatility
CGRO vs. ONLN - Volatility Comparison
CoreValues Alpha Greater China Growth ETF (CGRO) and ProShares Online Retail ETF (ONLN) have volatilities of 7.53% and 7.52%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| CGRO | ONLN | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 7.53% | 7.52% | +0.01% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 16.19% | 18.74% | -2.55% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 22.86% | 24.77% | -1.91% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 28.77% | 32.99% | -4.22% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 28.77% | 32.01% | -3.24% |
CGRO vs. ONLN - Expense Ratio Comparison
CGRO has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is higher than ONLN's 0.58% expense ratio.
Dividends
CGRO vs. ONLN - Dividend Comparison
CGRO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.40%, more than ONLN's 0.29% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CGRO CoreValues Alpha Greater China Growth ETF | 3.40% | 2.48% | 2.47% | 0.21% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
ONLN ProShares Online Retail ETF | 0.29% | 0.30% | 0.75% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 1.24% |
Frequently Asked Questions
CGRO and ONLN have a correlation of 0.54, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
CGRO has higher volatility (7.53%) compared to ONLN (7.52%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CGRO dropped -36.53% vs ONLN's -71.77%.
On 1-year performance, ONLN leads with 13.31% vs -16.82% for CGRO. On fees, ONLN is cheaper at 0.58% per year. Their volatility is very similar. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, ONLN has performed better with a 13.31% return vs -16.82%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
ONLN is cheaper with a 0.58% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for CGRO.
CGRO has the higher dividend yield at 3.40%, compared with 0.29% for ONLN.
CGRO is categorized as China Equities, while ONLN is Consumer Discretionary Equities. They also come from different issuers: CoreValues Alpha and ProShares. Their fees differ too: 0.75% for CGRO and 0.58% for ONLN.
ONLN currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.54 vs -0.74), 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 ONLN
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