CLCV vs. ABEQ

Last updated Jun 25, 2026

CLCV (Crossmark Large Cap Value ETF) and ABEQ (Absolute Select Value ETF) are both Large Cap Value Equities funds. Both are actively managed. A 0.62 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. CLCV charges 0.50%/yr vs 0.85%/yr for ABEQ.

Performance

CLCV vs. ABEQ - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Crossmark Large Cap Value ETF (CLCV) and Absolute Select Value ETF (ABEQ). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CLCV achieves a 12.94% return, which is significantly higher than ABEQ's 4.70% return.

CLCV

• 1D: -0.58%
• 1M: 2.19%
• YTD: 12.94%
• 6M: 11.53%
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

ABEQ

• 1D: 0.01%
• 1M: 0.02%
• YTD: 4.70%
• 6M: 3.42%
• 1Y: 10.27%
• 3Y*: 12.13%
• 5Y*: 7.99%
• 10Y*: —

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

CLCV vs. ABEQ - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
CLCV Crossmark Large Cap Value ETF	12.94%	5.36%
ABEQ Absolute Select Value ETF	4.70%	4.01%

Correlation

The correlation between CLCV and ABEQ is 0.62, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 23, 2025	0.62

Return for Risk

CLCV vs. ABEQ — Risk / Return Rank

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

CLCV

Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.

ABEQ

ABEQ Risk / Return Rank: 31
ABEQ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 35
ABEQ Sortino Ratio Rank: 34
ABEQ Omega Ratio Rank: 32
ABEQ Calmar Ratio Rank: 29
ABEQ Martin Ratio Rank: 24

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.

CLCV vs. ABEQ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Crossmark Large Cap Value ETF (CLCV) and Absolute Select Value ETF (ABEQ). 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.

	CLCV	ABEQ	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	—	1.15	—
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	—	1.67	—
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	—	1.20	—
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	—	1.31	—
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	—	2.88	—

Drawdowns

CLCV vs. ABEQ - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CLCV drawdown since its inception was -6.94%, smaller than the maximum ABEQ drawdown of -27.82%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CLCV and ABEQ.

Drawdown Indicators

	CLCV	ABEQ	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-6.94%	-27.82%	+20.88%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	—	-7.89%	—
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-7.95%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-17.26%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.05%	-6.30%	+4.25%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.44%	-4.10%	+2.66%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	—	3.57%	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	CLCV	ABEQ	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	—	2.10%	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	—	6.48%	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	12.27%	8.94%	+3.33%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	12.27%	10.77%	+1.50%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	12.27%	13.80%	-1.53%

CLCV vs. ABEQ - Expense Ratio Comparison

CLCV has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is lower than ABEQ's 0.85% expense ratio.

Dividends

CLCV vs. ABEQ - Dividend Comparison

CLCV's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.35%, less than ABEQ's 1.19% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
ABEQ Absolute Select Value ETF	1.19%	1.25%	1.48%	2.60%	1.20%	0.60%	0.60%
CLCV Crossmark Large Cap Value ETF	0.35%	0.40%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CLCV and ABEQ in my portfolio?

CLCV and ABEQ have a correlation of 0.62, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, CLCV or ABEQ?

On fees, CLCV is cheaper at 0.50% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, CLCV or ABEQ?

CLCV is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.85% for ABEQ.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, CLCV or ABEQ?

ABEQ has the higher dividend yield at 1.19%, compared with 0.35% for CLCV.

What is the main difference between CLCV and ABEQ?

They also come from different issuers: Crossmark and Absolute Investment Advisers LLC. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for CLCV and 0.85% for ABEQ.