CLDT vs. VONG

Last updated Jun 3, 2026

CLDT (Chatham Lodging Trust) is a stock, while VONG (Vanguard Russell 1000 Growth ETF) is Large Cap Growth Equities fund tracking the Russell 1000 Growth Index. Over the past 10 years, CLDT returned -3.03%/yr vs 18.61%/yr for VONG. At a 0.39 correlation, their price movements are largely independent.

Performance

CLDT vs. VONG - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Chatham Lodging Trust (CLDT) and Vanguard Russell 1000 Growth ETF (VONG). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CLDT achieves a 64.66% return, which is significantly higher than VONG's 7.17% return. Over the past 10 years, CLDT has underperformed VONG with an annualized return of -3.03%, while VONG has yielded a comparatively higher 18.61% annualized return.

CLDT

• 1D: 2.79%
• 1M: 26.37%
• YTD: 64.66%
• 6M: 68.81%
• 1Y: 63.97%
• 3Y*: 8.15%
• 5Y*: -1.26%
• 10Y*: -3.03%

VONG

• 1D: -1.32%
• 1M: 5.68%
• YTD: 7.17%
• 6M: 6.52%
• 1Y: 25.74%
• 3Y*: 24.92%
• 5Y*: 15.38%
• 10Y*: 18.61%

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

CLDT vs. VONG - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
CLDT Chatham Lodging Trust	64.66%	-19.89%	-13.83%	-10.13%	-10.05%	27.04%	-40.30%	11.32%	-17.05%	18.06%
VONG Vanguard Russell 1000 Growth ETF	7.17%	18.45%	33.20%	42.67%	-29.18%	27.60%	38.30%	36.06%	-1.53%	30.05%

Correlation

The correlation between CLDT and VONG is 0.26, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.26
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.33
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.40
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.34
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 23, 2010	0.39

The correlation between CLDT and VONG shifts across timeframes, from 0.26 (1 year) to 0.40 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

CLDT vs. VONG — Risk / Return Rank

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

CLDT

CLDT Risk / Return Rank: 86
CLDT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 88
CLDT Sortino Ratio Rank: 91
CLDT Omega Ratio Rank: 86
CLDT Calmar Ratio Rank: 84
CLDT Martin Ratio Rank: 83

VONG

VONG Risk / Return Rank: 41
VONG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 48
VONG Sortino Ratio Rank: 45
VONG Omega Ratio Rank: 45
VONG Calmar Ratio Rank: 32
VONG Martin Ratio Rank: 34

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.

CLDT vs. VONG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Chatham Lodging Trust (CLDT) and Vanguard Russell 1000 Growth ETF (VONG). 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.

	CLDT	VONG	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	2.10	1.68	+0.42
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	3.43	2.29	+1.13
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.37	1.29	+0.08
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.39	1.59	+1.79
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	7.69	5.34	+2.36
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

CLDT vs. VONG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CLDT Sharpe Ratio is 2.10, which is comparable to the VONG Sharpe Ratio of 1.68. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CLDT and VONG, 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

	CLDT	VONG	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.10	1.68	+0.42
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	-0.04	0.72	-0.76
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	-0.07	0.89	-0.97
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.01	0.90	-0.89

Drawdowns

CLDT vs. VONG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CLDT drawdown since its inception was -83.52%, which is greater than VONG's maximum drawdown of -32.72%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CLDT and VONG.

Drawdown Indicators

	CLDT	VONG	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-83.52%	-32.72%	-50.80%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-18.75%	-16.23%	-2.52%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-41.89%	-23.27%	-18.62%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-55.84%	-32.72%	-23.12%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-81.52%	-32.72%	-48.80%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-44.75%	-1.66%	-43.09%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-33.35%	-4.88%	-28.47%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	8.26%	4.83%	+3.43%

Volatility

CLDT vs. VONG - Volatility Comparison

Chatham Lodging Trust (CLDT) has a higher volatility of 13.88% compared to Vanguard Russell 1000 Growth ETF (VONG) at 3.60%. This indicates that CLDT's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than VONG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	CLDT	VONG	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	13.88%	3.60%	+10.28%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	23.97%	11.61%	+12.36%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	30.59%	15.37%	+15.22%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	33.08%	21.33%	+11.75%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	43.08%	20.87%	+22.21%

Dividends

CLDT vs. VONG - Dividend Comparison

CLDT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.34%, more than VONG's 0.43% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
CLDT Chatham Lodging Trust	3.34%	5.29%	3.13%	2.61%	0.57%	0.00%	2.04%	7.20%	7.47%	5.80%	6.72%	5.86%
VONG Vanguard Russell 1000 Growth ETF	0.43%	0.45%	0.55%	0.71%	0.98%	0.58%	0.77%	1.03%	1.18%	1.19%	1.48%	1.47%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CLDT and VONG in my portfolio?

CLDT and VONG have a correlation of 0.26, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, CLDT or VONG?

CLDT has higher volatility (13.88%) compared to VONG (3.60%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CLDT dropped -83.52% vs VONG's -32.72%.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

CLDT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.10 vs 1.68), 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.