CILGX vs. TOWFX
CILGX (Clarkston Fund) and TOWFX (Towpath Focus Fund) are both Large Cap Value Equities funds. Over the past 5 years, CILGX returned 1.47%/yr vs 11.32%/yr for TOWFX. Their correlation of 0.81 suggests significant overlap in exposure. CILGX charges 0.70%/yr vs 1.11%/yr for TOWFX.
Performance
CILGX vs. TOWFX - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, CILGX achieves a -9.14% return, which is significantly lower than TOWFX's 6.31% return.
CILGX
- 1D
- -1.55%
- 1M
- -2.21%
- YTD
- -9.14%
- 6M
- -9.59%
- 1Y
- -0.83%
- 3Y*
- 4.41%
- 5Y*
- 1.47%
- 10Y*
- —
TOWFX
- 1D
- -0.25%
- 1M
- -1.03%
- YTD
- 6.31%
- 6M
- 5.69%
- 1Y
- 22.98%
- 3Y*
- 18.30%
- 5Y*
- 11.32%
- 10Y*
- —
CILGX vs. TOWFX - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CILGX Clarkston Fund | -9.14% | 8.29% | 6.79% | 17.86% | -8.60% | 10.90% | 16.93% | 0.24% |
TOWFX Towpath Focus Fund | 6.31% | 23.51% | 13.22% | 12.33% | -2.06% | 26.52% | 19.46% | 0.00% |
Correlation
The correlation between CILGX and TOWFX is 0.59, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.59 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.70 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.78 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 31, 2019 | 0.81 |
Over the past year, the correlation between CILGX and TOWFX has dropped to 0.59 - well below their long-term average of 0.81, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.
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
CILGX vs. TOWFX — Risk / Return Rank
CILGX
TOWFX
CILGX vs. TOWFX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Clarkston Fund (CILGX) and Towpath Focus Fund (TOWFX). 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.
| CILGX | TOWFX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -2.56 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -3.63 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.00 | 1.44 | -0.44 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.07 | 4.87 | -4.94 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -0.16 | 18.22 | -18.38 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
CILGX vs. TOWFX - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CILGX drawdown since its inception was -33.57%, smaller than the maximum TOWFX drawdown of -96.18%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CILGX and TOWFX.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| CILGX | TOWFX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -33.57% | -96.18% | +62.61% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -12.30% | -4.72% | -7.58% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -15.60% | -96.18% | +80.58% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -21.80% | -96.18% | +74.38% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -12.30% | -94.74% | +82.44% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -5.84% | -23.58% | +17.74% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 5.45% | 1.26% | +4.19% |
Volatility
CILGX vs. TOWFX - Volatility Comparison
Clarkston Fund (CILGX) has a higher volatility of 4.58% compared to Towpath Focus Fund (TOWFX) at 2.87%. This indicates that CILGX's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than TOWFX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| CILGX | TOWFX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 4.58% | 2.87% | +1.71% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 11.75% | 6.92% | +4.83% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 15.70% | 9.19% | +6.51% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 16.81% | 1,041.97% | -1,025.16% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 17.93% | 916.34% | -898.41% |
CILGX vs. TOWFX - Expense Ratio Comparison
CILGX has a 0.70% expense ratio, which is lower than TOWFX's 1.11% expense ratio.
Dividends
CILGX vs. TOWFX - Dividend Comparison
CILGX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.50%, more than TOWFX's 1.72% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CILGX Clarkston Fund | 4.50% | 4.09% | 0.88% | 3.44% | 5.14% | 3.16% | 5.87% | 5.93% | 4.77% |
TOWFX Towpath Focus Fund | 1.72% | 1.82% | 1.49% | 2.81% | 2.05% | 5.69% | 5.94% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
CILGX and TOWFX have a correlation of 0.59, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
CILGX has higher volatility (4.58%) compared to TOWFX (2.87%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CILGX dropped -33.57% vs TOWFX's -96.18%.
TOWFX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.50 vs -0.06), 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.
Find the right allocation for CILGX and TOWFX
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