CGXU vs. UMMA

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

CGXU (Capital Group International Focus Equity ETF) and UMMA (Wahed Dow Jones Islamic World ETF) are both Foreign Large Cap Equities funds. CGXU is actively managed, while UMMA is passively managed. Over the past 3 years, CGXU returned 18.00%/yr vs 22.73%/yr for UMMA. Their correlation of 0.90 suggests significant overlap in exposure. CGXU charges 0.54%/yr vs 0.65%/yr for UMMA.

Performance

CGXU vs. UMMA - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Capital Group International Focus Equity ETF (CGXU) and Wahed Dow Jones Islamic World ETF (UMMA). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CGXU achieves a 19.90% return, which is significantly lower than UMMA's 32.49% return.

CGXU

• 1D: -1.14%
• 1M: 10.58%
• YTD: 19.90%
• 6M: 22.54%
• 1Y: 41.14%
• 3Y*: 18.00%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

UMMA

• 1D: -0.77%
• 1M: 14.49%
• YTD: 32.49%
• 6M: 35.58%
• 1Y: 53.55%
• 3Y*: 22.73%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

CGXU vs. UMMA - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
CGXU Capital Group International Focus Equity ETF	19.90%	26.31%	4.36%	15.75%	-14.34%
UMMA Wahed Dow Jones Islamic World ETF	32.49%	26.65%	4.67%	18.84%	-12.18%

Correlation

The correlation between CGXU and UMMA is 0.91, 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	0.91
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.88
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 25, 2022	0.90

The correlation between CGXU and UMMA has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.88 to 0.91 - a consistent structural relationship.

CGXU vs. UMMA - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	CGXU	UMMA
Technology	21.6%	42.9%
Industrials	15.4%	13.5%
Financial Services	13.9%	-
Basic Materials	11.0%	9.3%
Communication Services	10.5%	0.8%
Energy	7.5%	2.9%
Consumer Cyclical	6.6%	8.1%
Consumer Defensive	6.2%	5.6%
Healthcare	4.7%	16.6%
Utilities	2.5%	-
Real Estate	-	0.5%

Return for Risk

CGXU vs. UMMA — Risk / Return Rank

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

CGXU

CGXU Risk / Return Rank: 62
CGXU Sharpe Ratio Rank: 61
CGXU Sortino Ratio Rank: 60
CGXU Omega Ratio Rank: 60
CGXU Calmar Ratio Rank: 63
CGXU Martin Ratio Rank: 64

UMMA

UMMA Risk / Return Rank: 75
UMMA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 81
UMMA Sortino Ratio Rank: 77
UMMA Omega Ratio Rank: 75
UMMA Calmar Ratio Rank: 71
UMMA Martin Ratio Rank: 73

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.

CGXU vs. UMMA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Capital Group International Focus Equity ETF (CGXU) and Wahed Dow Jones Islamic World ETF (UMMA). 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.

	CGXU	UMMA	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.09	2.68	-0.59
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.85	3.53	-0.68
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.37	1.46	-0.09
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.14	3.60	-0.46
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	11.72	14.07	-2.35
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

CGXU vs. UMMA - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CGXU Sharpe Ratio is 2.09, which is comparable to the UMMA Sharpe Ratio of 2.68. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CGXU and UMMA, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	CGXU	UMMA	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.09	2.68	-0.59
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.56	0.58	-0.02

Drawdowns

CGXU vs. UMMA - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CGXU drawdown since its inception was -25.64%, smaller than the maximum UMMA drawdown of -34.17%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CGXU and UMMA.

Drawdown Indicators

	CGXU	UMMA	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-25.64%	-34.17%	+8.53%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-13.14%	-14.93%	+1.79%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-21.63%	-18.73%	-2.90%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.14%	-0.77%	-0.37%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-6.66%	-9.82%	+3.16%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.52%	3.82%	-0.30%

Volatility

CGXU vs. UMMA - Volatility Comparison

Capital Group International Focus Equity ETF (CGXU) and Wahed Dow Jones Islamic World ETF (UMMA) have volatilities of 7.31% and 7.64%, 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.

Volatility by Period

	CGXU	UMMA	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	7.31%	7.64%	-0.33%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	17.05%	17.26%	-0.21%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	19.83%	20.10%	-0.27%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	19.93%	20.55%	-0.62%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	19.93%	20.55%	-0.62%

CGXU vs. UMMA - Expense Ratio Comparison

CGXU has a 0.54% expense ratio, which is lower than UMMA's 0.65% expense ratio.

Dividends

CGXU vs. UMMA - Dividend Comparison

CGXU's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.43%, more than UMMA's 0.93% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022
CGXU Capital Group International Focus Equity ETF	4.43%	5.31%	1.01%	0.99%	0.95%
UMMA Wahed Dow Jones Islamic World ETF	0.93%	1.02%	0.91%	1.09%	1.77%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CGXU and UMMA in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.91, CGXU and UMMA move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

Which is riskier, CGXU or UMMA?

UMMA has higher volatility (7.64%) compared to CGXU (7.31%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CGXU dropped -25.64% vs UMMA's -34.17%.

Which ETF is better, CGXU or UMMA?

On 3-year performance, UMMA leads with 22.73% vs 18.00% for CGXU. On fees, CGXU is cheaper at 0.54% per year. On volatility, CGXU has been the lower-risk option at 7.31%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, CGXU or UMMA?

Over the 3-year period, UMMA has performed better with a 22.73% return vs 18.00%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, CGXU or UMMA?

CGXU is cheaper with a 0.54% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for UMMA.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, CGXU or UMMA?

CGXU has the higher dividend yield at 4.43%, compared with 0.93% for UMMA.

What is the main difference between CGXU and UMMA?

They also come from different issuers: Capital Group and Wahed. Their fees differ too: 0.54% for CGXU and 0.65% for UMMA.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

UMMA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.68 vs 2.09), 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.