PortfoliosLab logo
PortfoliosLab logo
Tools
Performance Analysis
Portfolio Analysis
Factor Model
Portfolios
Lazy PortfoliosUser Portfolios
Discussions
CGRO vs. VOO
Performance
Risk-Adjusted Performance
Dividends
Drawdowns
Volatility

Correlation

The correlation between CGRO and VOO is 0.32, which is considered to be low. This implies their price changes are not closely related. A low correlation is generally favorable for portfolio diversification, as it helps to reduce overall risk by spreading it across multiple assets with different performance patterns.


-0.50.00.51.00.3

Performance

CGRO vs. VOO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in CoreValues Alpha Greater China Growth ETF (CGRO) and Vanguard S&P 500 ETF (VOO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

-10.00%0.00%10.00%20.00%30.00%40.00%AugustSeptemberOctoberNovemberDecember2025
11.86%
3.78%
CGRO
VOO

Key characteristics

Daily Std Dev

CGRO:

34.27%

VOO:

12.70%

Max Drawdown

CGRO:

-22.48%

VOO:

-33.99%

Current Drawdown

CGRO:

-20.36%

VOO:

-3.91%

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CGRO achieves a -3.04% return, which is significantly lower than VOO's -0.66% return.


CGRO

YTD

-3.04%

1M

-4.01%

6M

11.86%

1Y

16.15%

5Y*

N/A

10Y*

N/A

VOO

YTD

-0.66%

1M

-3.35%

6M

3.78%

1Y

23.82%

5Y*

13.79%

10Y*

13.26%

*Annualized

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.


CGRO vs. VOO - Expense Ratio Comparison

CGRO has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is higher than VOO's 0.03% expense ratio.


CGRO
CoreValues Alpha Greater China Growth ETF
Expense ratio chart for CGRO: current value at 0.75% compared with the broader market ranging from 0.00% to 2.12%.0.50%1.00%1.50%2.00%0.75%
Expense ratio chart for VOO: current value at 0.03% compared with the broader market ranging from 0.00% to 2.12%.0.50%1.00%1.50%2.00%0.03%

Risk-Adjusted Performance

CGRO vs. VOO — Risk-Adjusted Performance Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

CGRO
The Risk-Adjusted Performance Rank of CGRO is 3131
Overall Rank
The Sharpe Ratio Rank of CGRO is 2626
Sharpe Ratio Rank
The Sortino Ratio Rank of CGRO is 3232
Sortino Ratio Rank
The Omega Ratio Rank of CGRO is 3333
Omega Ratio Rank
The Calmar Ratio Rank of CGRO is 4040
Calmar Ratio Rank
The Martin Ratio Rank of CGRO is 2424
Martin Ratio Rank

VOO
The Risk-Adjusted Performance Rank of VOO is 8282
Overall Rank
The Sharpe Ratio Rank of VOO is 8282
Sharpe Ratio Rank
The Sortino Ratio Rank of VOO is 8080
Sortino Ratio Rank
The Omega Ratio Rank of VOO is 8282
Omega Ratio Rank
The Calmar Ratio Rank of VOO is 8282
Calmar Ratio Rank
The Martin Ratio Rank of VOO is 8484
Martin Ratio Rank
The risk-adjusted ranks indicate the investment's position relative to the market. A rank closer to 100 signifies top-performing investments, while a rank closer to 0 might suggest underperformance, based on the selected ratio. The values are calculated based on the past 12 months of returns.

CGRO vs. VOO - Risk-Adjusted Performance Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for CoreValues Alpha Greater China Growth ETF (CGRO) and Vanguard S&P 500 ETF (VOO). 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.


Sharpe ratio
The chart of Sharpe ratio for CGRO, currently valued at 0.54, compared to the broader market0.002.004.000.541.88
The chart of Sortino ratio for CGRO, currently valued at 1.00, compared to the broader market-2.000.002.004.006.008.0010.0012.001.002.52
The chart of Omega ratio for CGRO, currently valued at 1.14, compared to the broader market0.501.001.502.002.503.001.141.35
The chart of Calmar ratio for CGRO, currently valued at 0.73, compared to the broader market0.005.0010.0015.000.732.83
The chart of Martin ratio for CGRO, currently valued at 1.47, compared to the broader market0.0020.0040.0060.0080.00100.001.4711.96
CGRO
VOO


Rolling 12-month Sharpe Ratio0.001.002.003.004.00Oct 20Oct 27Nov 03Nov 10Nov 17Nov 24DecemberDec 08Dec 15Dec 22Dec 29Jan 05Jan 12
0.54
1.88
CGRO
VOO

Dividends

CGRO vs. VOO - Dividend Comparison

CGRO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.54%, more than VOO's 1.25% yield.


TTM20242023202220212020201920182017201620152014
CGRO
CoreValues Alpha Greater China Growth ETF
2.54%2.47%0.21%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
VOO
Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
1.25%1.24%1.46%1.69%1.25%1.54%1.88%2.06%1.78%2.02%2.10%1.85%

Drawdowns

CGRO vs. VOO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CGRO drawdown since its inception was -22.48%, smaller than the maximum VOO drawdown of -33.99%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CGRO and VOO. For additional features, visit the drawdowns tool.


-20.00%-15.00%-10.00%-5.00%0.00%AugustSeptemberOctoberNovemberDecember2025
-20.36%
-3.91%
CGRO
VOO

Volatility

CGRO vs. VOO - Volatility Comparison

CoreValues Alpha Greater China Growth ETF (CGRO) has a higher volatility of 5.91% compared to Vanguard S&P 500 ETF (VOO) at 4.56%. This indicates that CGRO's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than VOO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


0.00%5.00%10.00%15.00%20.00%AugustSeptemberOctoberNovemberDecember2025
5.91%
4.56%
CGRO
VOO
PortfoliosLab logo
Performance Analysis
Portfolio AnalysisPortfolio PerformanceStock ComparisonSharpe RatioMartin RatioTreynor RatioSortino RatioOmega RatioCalmar RatioSummers Ratio
Community
Discussions


Disclaimer

The information contained herein does not constitute investment advice and made available for educational purposes only. Prices and returns on equities are listed without consideration of fees, commissions, taxes, penalties, or interest payable due to purchasing, holding, or selling.

Copyright © 2025 PortfoliosLab