PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
CGUS vs. USMV
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

CGUS vs. USMV

Last updated Jul 14, 2026
Documentation

CGUS (Capital Group Core Equity ETF) and USMV (iShares MSCI USA Min Vol Factor ETF) are both Large Cap Blend Equities funds. CGUS is actively managed, while USMV is passively managed. Over the past 3 years, CGUS returned 20.76%/yr vs 11.43%/yr for USMV. A 0.73 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. CGUS charges 0.33%/yr vs 0.15%/yr for USMV.

Performance

CGUS vs. USMV - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Capital Group Core Equity ETF (CGUS) and iShares MSCI USA Min Vol Factor ETF (USMV). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CGUS achieves a 10.94% return, which is significantly higher than USMV's 4.64% return.

CGUS

1D
-0.79%
1M
1.86%
6M
8.43%
YTD
10.94%
1Y
19.41%
3Y*
20.76%
5Y*
—
10Y*
—

USMV

1D
0.06%
1M
2.16%
6M
3.87%
YTD
4.64%
1Y
7.10%
3Y*
11.43%
5Y*
7.16%
10Y*
9.58%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

CGUS vs. USMV - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)2025202420232022
CGUS
Capital Group Core Equity ETF		10.94%16.21%24.89%27.72%-4.78%
USMV
iShares MSCI USA Min Vol Factor ETF		4.64%7.65%15.74%10.33%1.94%

Correlation

The correlation between CGUS and USMV is 0.43, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.43

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.62

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 24, 2022

0.73

Over the past year, the correlation between CGUS and USMV has dropped to 0.43 - well below their long-term average of 0.73, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

CGUS vs. USMV - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
CGUS
USMV

Technology

40.7%
33.9%

Communication Services

10.6%
6.2%

Consumer Cyclical

10.0%
5.7%

Financial Services

9.2%
11.7%

Healthcare

8.8%
12.6%

Industrials

8.4%
6.1%

Energy

3.5%
2.7%

Consumer Defensive

3.4%
9.4%

Basic Materials

2.3%
2.4%

Utilities

1.8%
6.9%

Real Estate

1.4%
2.5%

Technology

CGUS
40.7%
USMV
33.9%

Communication Services

CGUS
10.6%
USMV
6.2%

Consumer Cyclical

CGUS
10.0%
USMV
5.7%

Financial Services

CGUS
9.2%
USMV
11.7%

Healthcare

CGUS
8.8%
USMV
12.6%

Industrials

CGUS
8.4%
USMV
6.1%

Energy

CGUS
3.5%
USMV
2.7%

Consumer Defensive

CGUS
3.4%
USMV
9.4%

Basic Materials

CGUS
2.3%
USMV
2.4%

Utilities

CGUS
1.8%
USMV
6.9%

Real Estate

CGUS
1.4%
USMV
2.5%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

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

Capital Group Core Equity ETF

iShares MSCI USA Min Vol Factor ETF

Often compared with CGUS:
CGUS vs. AGTHXCGUS vs. VOOCGUS vs. CGDVCGUS vs. DUHPCGUS vs. JUEMXCGUS vs. SCHGCGUS vs. JPEF
Often compared with USMV:
USMV vs. SPLVUSMV vs. SPYUSMV vs. VOOUSMV vs. QUALUSMV vs. VFMVUSMV vs. ACWVUSMV vs. VTI

Return for Risk

CGUS vs. USMV — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
CGUS
CGUS Risk / Return Rank: 5656
Overall Rank
CGUS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5555
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CGUS Sortino Ratio Rank: 5353
Sortino Ratio Rank
CGUS Omega Ratio Rank: 5555
Omega Ratio Rank
CGUS Calmar Ratio Rank: 5151
Calmar Ratio Rank
CGUS Martin Ratio Rank: 6565
Martin Ratio Rank
USMV
USMV Risk / Return Rank: 2828
Overall Rank
USMV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2929
Sharpe Ratio Rank
USMV Sortino Ratio Rank: 2626
Sortino Ratio Rank
USMV Omega Ratio Rank: 2525
Omega Ratio Rank
USMV Calmar Ratio Rank: 2828
Calmar Ratio Rank
USMV Martin Ratio Rank: 3131
Martin Ratio Rank
The rank (0–100) shows how this investment's returns compare to the risk taken. Higher = better. Based on the past 12 months of data, combining Sharpe, Sortino, and other metrics used by quantitative funds and institutional investors.

CGUS vs. USMV - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Capital Group Core Equity ETF (CGUS) and iShares MSCI USA Min Vol Factor ETF (USMV). 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.

CGUSUSMVDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
1.49
0.84

+0.65

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
2.07
1.23

+0.84

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.27

1.15

+0.12

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.03

1.10

+0.93

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

9.21

3.61

+5.60

CGUS vs. USMV - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CGUS Sharpe Ratio is 1.49, which is higher than the USMV Sharpe Ratio of 0.84. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CGUS and USMV, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Loading charts...

Drawdowns

CGUS vs. USMV - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CGUS drawdown since its inception was -21.86%, smaller than the maximum USMV drawdown of -33.10%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CGUS and USMV.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

CGUSUSMVDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-21.86%

-33.10%

+11.24%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-9.59%

-6.46%

-3.13%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-18.06%

-9.36%

-8.70%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

—

-17.93%

—

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

—

-33.10%

—

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.79%

-0.54%

-0.25%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-4.56%

-2.87%

-1.69%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.11%

1.97%

+0.14%

Volatility

CGUS vs. USMV - Volatility Comparison

Capital Group Core Equity ETF (CGUS) has a higher volatility of 4.18% compared to iShares MSCI USA Min Vol Factor ETF (USMV) at 2.54%. This indicates that CGUS's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than USMV based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

CGUSUSMVDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.18%

2.54%

+1.64%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

10.49%

6.22%

+4.27%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

13.12%

8.48%

+4.64%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

16.46%

12.36%

+4.10%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

16.46%

14.49%

+1.97%

CGUS vs. USMV - Expense Ratio Comparison

CGUS has a 0.33% expense ratio, which is higher than USMV's 0.15% expense ratio.

Dividends

CGUS vs. USMV - Dividend Comparison

CGUS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.83%, less than USMV's 1.48% yield.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
CGUS
Capital Group Core Equity ETF		0.83%0.95%1.02%1.22%1.10%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
USMV
iShares MSCI USA Min Vol Factor ETF		1.48%1.49%1.67%1.82%1.62%1.26%1.81%1.88%2.12%1.77%2.22%2.02%

Frequently Asked Questions

CGUS and USMV have a correlation of 0.43, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

CGUS has higher volatility (4.18%) compared to USMV (2.54%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CGUS dropped -21.86% vs USMV's -33.10%.

On 3-year performance, CGUS leads with 20.76% vs 11.43% for USMV. On fees, USMV is cheaper at 0.15% per year. On volatility, USMV has been the lower-risk option at 2.54%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 3-year period, CGUS has performed better with a 20.76% return vs 11.43%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

USMV is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.33% for CGUS.

USMV has the higher dividend yield at 1.48%, compared with 0.83% for CGUS.

They also come from different issuers: Capital Group and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.33% for CGUS and 0.15% for USMV.

CGUS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.49 vs 0.84), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for CGUS and USMV

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