CGV vs. DFIS

Last updated Apr 1, 2026

Compare and contrast key facts about Conductor Global Equity Value ETF (CGV) and Dimensional International Small Cap ETF (DFIS).

CGV and DFIS are both exchange-traded funds (ETFs), meaning they are traded on stock exchanges and can be bought and sold throughout the day. CGV is an actively managed fund by Conductor Fund. It was launched on Apr 19, 2016. DFIS is an actively managed fund by Dimensional. It was launched on Mar 23, 2022.

Performance

CGV vs. DFIS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Conductor Global Equity Value ETF (CGV) and Dimensional International Small Cap ETF (DFIS). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

CGV vs. DFIS - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
CGV Conductor Global Equity Value ETF	6.16%	23.11%	-3.34%	5.72%	3.44%
DFIS Dimensional International Small Cap ETF	2.31%	37.49%	3.80%	15.19%	-2.02%

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CGV achieves a 6.16% return, which is significantly higher than DFIS's 2.31% return.

CGV

• 1D: 2.83%
• 1M: -8.21%
• YTD: 6.16%
• 6M: 9.28%
• 1Y: 30.67%
• 3Y*: 9.97%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

DFIS

• 1D: 3.12%
• 1M: -8.99%
• YTD: 2.31%
• 6M: 7.05%
• 1Y: 33.50%
• 3Y*: 16.25%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

CGV vs. DFIS - Expense Ratio Comparison

CGV has a 1.25% expense ratio, which is higher than DFIS's 0.39% expense ratio.

CGV

Conductor Global Equity Value ETF

DFIS

Dimensional International Small Cap ETF

Return for Risk

CGV vs. DFIS — Risk / Return Rank

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

CGV

CGV Risk / Return Rank: 87
CGV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 88
CGV Sortino Ratio Rank: 89
CGV Omega Ratio Rank: 90
CGV Calmar Ratio Rank: 84
CGV Martin Ratio Rank: 83

DFIS

DFIS Risk / Return Rank: 89
DFIS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 90
DFIS Sortino Ratio Rank: 91
DFIS Omega Ratio Rank: 92
DFIS Calmar Ratio Rank: 86
DFIS Martin Ratio Rank: 88

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.

CGV vs. DFIS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Conductor Global Equity Value ETF (CGV) and Dimensional International Small Cap ETF (DFIS). 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.

	CGV	DFIS	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	1.90	1.97	-0.07
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	2.54	2.62	-0.08
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.39	1.40	-0.02
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.49	2.55	-0.06
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	9.59	10.38	-0.79
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

CGV vs. DFIS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CGV Sharpe Ratio is 1.90, which is comparable to the DFIS Sharpe Ratio of 1.97. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CGV and DFIS, offering insights into how both investments have performed under varying market conditions. These values are calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	CGV	DFIS	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.90	1.97	-0.07
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.69	0.58	+0.11

Correlation

The correlation between CGV and DFIS is 0.83, which is considered to be high. That indicates a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Having highly-correlated positions in a portfolio may signal a lack of diversification, potentially leading to increased risk during market downturns.

Dividends

CGV vs. DFIS - Dividend Comparison

CGV's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.17%, more than DFIS's 2.18% yield.

	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022
CGV Conductor Global Equity Value ETF	5.17%	4.58%	2.87%	4.56%	0.71%
DFIS Dimensional International Small Cap ETF	2.18%	2.23%	2.19%	2.36%	1.13%

Drawdowns

CGV vs. DFIS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CGV drawdown since its inception was -16.64%, smaller than the maximum DFIS drawdown of -27.23%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CGV and DFIS.

Drawdown Indicators

	CGV	DFIS	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-16.64%	-27.23%	+10.59%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-12.13%	-12.44%	+0.31%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-8.21%	-8.99%	+0.78%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.67%	-6.30%	+2.63%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.15%	3.06%	+0.09%

Volatility

CGV vs. DFIS - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Conductor Global Equity Value ETF (CGV) is 6.94%, while Dimensional International Small Cap ETF (DFIS) has a volatility of 7.55%. This indicates that CGV experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than DFIS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	CGV	DFIS	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.94%	7.55%	-0.61%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	10.88%	11.01%	-0.13%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	16.21%	17.10%	-0.89%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	13.39%	17.31%	-3.92%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	13.39%	17.31%	-3.92%