CLCV vs. FUNL

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

CLCV (Crossmark Large Cap Value ETF) and FUNL (CornerCap Fundametrics Large-Cap ETF FUNL) are both Large Cap Value Equities funds. Both are actively managed. A 0.69 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. Both charge a 0.50% expense ratio.

Performance

CLCV vs. FUNL - Performance Comparison

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CLCV achieves a 13.65% return, which is significantly higher than FUNL's 5.66% return.

CLCV

• 1D: -0.54%
• 1M: 8.29%
• YTD: 13.65%
• 6M: 16.11%
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

FUNL

• 1D: 0.00%
• 1M: 0.00%
• YTD: 5.66%
• 6M: 7.22%
• 1Y: 18.97%
• 3Y*: 16.53%
• 5Y*: 9.42%
• 10Y*: —

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

CLCV vs. FUNL - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
CLCV Crossmark Large Cap Value ETF	13.65%	4.88%
FUNL CornerCap Fundametrics Large-Cap ETF FUNL	5.66%	7.17%

Correlation

The correlation between CLCV and FUNL is 0.69, 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 24, 2025	0.69

Return for Risk

CLCV vs. FUNL — Risk / Return Rank

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

FUNL

FUNL Risk / Return Rank: 80
FUNL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 67
FUNL Sortino Ratio Rank: 72
FUNL Omega Ratio Rank: 79
FUNL Calmar Ratio Rank: 87
FUNL Martin Ratio Rank: 92

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. FUNL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Crossmark Large Cap Value ETF (CLCV) and CornerCap Fundametrics Large-Cap ETF FUNL (FUNL). 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.

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

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	CLCV	FUNL	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	—	2.19	—
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.63	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.88	0.95	+0.93

Drawdowns

CLCV vs. FUNL - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CLCV drawdown since its inception was -6.94%, smaller than the maximum FUNL drawdown of -19.35%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CLCV and FUNL.

Drawdown Indicators

	CLCV	FUNL	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-6.94%	-19.35%	+12.41%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	—	-3.83%	—
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-17.37%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-19.35%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.54%	-0.12%	-0.42%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.46%	-3.54%	+2.08%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	—	0.82%	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	CLCV	FUNL	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	—	0.00%	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	—	5.24%	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	12.03%	8.82%	+3.21%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	12.03%	15.16%	-3.13%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	12.03%	15.29%	-3.26%

CLCV vs. FUNL - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both CLCV and FUNL have an expense ratio of 0.50%.

Dividends

CLCV vs. FUNL - Dividend Comparison

CLCV's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.35%, less than FUNL's 2.25% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
CLCV Crossmark Large Cap Value ETF	0.35%	0.40%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
FUNL CornerCap Fundametrics Large-Cap ETF FUNL	2.25%	2.10%	1.78%	1.69%	1.84%	1.55%	0.45%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CLCV and FUNL in my portfolio?

CLCV and FUNL have a correlation of 0.69, 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 FUNL?

Both ETFs have the same 0.50% expense ratio. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, CLCV or FUNL?

CLCV and FUNL have the same expense ratio: 0.50% per year.

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

FUNL has the higher dividend yield at 2.25%, compared with 0.35% for CLCV.

What is the main difference between CLCV and FUNL?

They also come from different issuers: Crossmark and CornerCap.