PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
CGVV vs. LVDS
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

CGVV vs. LVDS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Capital Group U.S. Large Value ETF (CGVV) and JPMorgan Fundamental Data Science Large Value ETF (LVDS). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CGVV achieves a 14.38% return, which is significantly lower than LVDS's 17.80% return.


CGVV

1D
-0.16%
1M
0.62%
6M
10.00%
YTD
14.38%
1Y
19.83%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*

LVDS

1D
-0.40%
1M
2.37%
6M
14.80%
YTD
17.80%
1Y
26.33%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

CGVV vs. LVDS - Yearly Performance Comparison


Correlation

The correlation between CGVV and LVDS is 0.88, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.


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

0.88

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 14, 2025

0.88

The correlation between CGVV and LVDS has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.88 to 0.88 - a consistent structural relationship.

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

CGVV vs. LVDS — Risk / Return Rank

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

CGVV
CGVV Risk / Return Rank: 5151
Overall Rank
CGVV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5252
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CGVV Sortino Ratio Rank: 5252
Sortino Ratio Rank
CGVV Omega Ratio Rank: 4848
Omega Ratio Rank
CGVV Calmar Ratio Rank: 4949
Calmar Ratio Rank
CGVV Martin Ratio Rank: 5656
Martin Ratio Rank

LVDS
LVDS Risk / Return Rank: 9090
Overall Rank
LVDS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9292
Sharpe Ratio Rank
LVDS Sortino Ratio Rank: 9292
Sortino Ratio Rank
LVDS Omega Ratio Rank: 9090
Omega Ratio Rank
LVDS Calmar Ratio Rank: 8787
Calmar Ratio Rank
LVDS Martin Ratio Rank: 9090
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.

CGVV vs. LVDS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Capital Group U.S. Large Value ETF (CGVV) and JPMorgan Fundamental Data Science Large Value ETF (LVDS). 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.


CGVVLVDSDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-1.07

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-1.48

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.25

1.45

-0.20

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.97

3.98

-2.01

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

7.69

16.14

-8.45

CGVV vs. LVDS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CGVV Sharpe Ratio is 1.43, which is lower than the LVDS Sharpe Ratio of 2.50. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CGVV and LVDS, 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

CGVV vs. LVDS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CGVV drawdown since its inception was -10.11%, which is greater than LVDS's maximum drawdown of -6.64%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CGVV and LVDS.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


CGVVLVDSDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-10.11%

-6.64%

-3.47%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-10.11%

-6.64%

-3.47%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.78%

-0.41%

-0.37%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-1.56%

-0.92%

-0.64%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.59%

1.64%

+0.95%

Volatility

CGVV vs. LVDS - Volatility Comparison

Capital Group U.S. Large Value ETF (CGVV) has a higher volatility of 3.78% compared to JPMorgan Fundamental Data Science Large Value ETF (LVDS) at 3.01%. This indicates that CGVV's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than LVDS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


CGVVLVDSDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.78%

3.01%

+0.77%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

10.65%

8.14%

+2.51%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

13.90%

10.58%

+3.32%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

13.72%

10.58%

+3.14%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

13.72%

10.58%

+3.14%

CGVV vs. LVDS - Expense Ratio Comparison

CGVV has a 0.33% expense ratio, which is higher than LVDS's 0.30% expense ratio.


Dividends

CGVV vs. LVDS - Dividend Comparison

CGVV's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.85%, less than LVDS's 7.64% yield.


Frequently Asked Questions


CGVV and LVDS have a correlation of 0.88, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

CGVV has higher volatility (3.78%) compared to LVDS (3.01%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CGVV dropped -10.11% vs LVDS's -6.64%.

On 1-year performance, LVDS leads with 26.33% vs 19.83% for CGVV. On fees, LVDS is cheaper at 0.30% per year. On volatility, LVDS has been the lower-risk option at 3.01%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, LVDS has performed better with a 26.33% return vs 19.83%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

LVDS is cheaper with a 0.30% expense ratio, compared with 0.33% for CGVV.

LVDS has the higher dividend yield at 7.64%, compared with 0.85% for CGVV.

They also come from different issuers: Capital Group and JPMorgan. Their fees differ too: 0.33% for CGVV and 0.30% for LVDS.

LVDS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.50 vs 1.43), 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 CGVV and LVDS

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