CPLS vs. LRGC

Last updated Jun 23, 2026

CPLS (AB Core Plus Bond ETF) and LRGC (AB US Large Cap Strategic Equities ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - CPLS is a Intermediate Core-Plus Bond fund actively managed by AllianceBernstein, while LRGC is a Large Cap Blend Equities fund actively managed by AllianceBernstein. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, CPLS returned 4.59% vs 22.28% for LRGC. At a 0.26 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. CPLS charges 0.33%/yr vs 0.48%/yr for LRGC.

Performance

CPLS vs. LRGC - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in AB Core Plus Bond ETF (CPLS) and AB US Large Cap Strategic Equities ETF (LRGC). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CPLS achieves a 0.47% return, which is significantly lower than LRGC's 6.99% return.

CPLS

• 1D: -0.25%
• 1M: 0.53%
• YTD: 0.47%
• 6M: 0.56%
• 1Y: 4.59%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

LRGC

• 1D: -0.64%
• 1M: 0.33%
• YTD: 6.99%
• 6M: 6.94%
• 1Y: 22.28%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

CPLS vs. LRGC - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
CPLS AB Core Plus Bond ETF	0.47%	6.91%	1.65%	2.13%
LRGC AB US Large Cap Strategic Equities ETF	6.99%	16.23%	24.92%	2.50%

Correlation

The correlation between CPLS and LRGC is 0.37, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.37
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 13, 2023	0.26

The correlation between CPLS and LRGC shifts across timeframes, from 0.26 (all time) to 0.37 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

CPLS vs. LRGC — Risk / Return Rank

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

CPLS

CPLS Risk / Return Rank: 35
CPLS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 34
CPLS Sortino Ratio Rank: 35
CPLS Omega Ratio Rank: 32
CPLS Calmar Ratio Rank: 38
CPLS Martin Ratio Rank: 37

LRGC

LRGC Risk / Return Rank: 52
LRGC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 55
LRGC Sortino Ratio Rank: 53
LRGC Omega Ratio Rank: 54
LRGC Calmar Ratio Rank: 46
LRGC Martin Ratio Rank: 54

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.

CPLS vs. LRGC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for AB Core Plus Bond ETF (CPLS) and AB US Large Cap Strategic Equities ETF (LRGC). 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.

	CPLS	LRGC	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.19	1.80	-0.61
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.80	2.48	-0.68
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.21	1.32	-0.12
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.86	2.24	-0.37
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	5.58	9.18	-3.60

CPLS vs. LRGC - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CPLS Sharpe Ratio is 1.19, which is lower than the LRGC Sharpe Ratio of 1.80. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CPLS and LRGC, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

CPLS vs. LRGC - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CPLS drawdown since its inception was -4.43%, smaller than the maximum LRGC drawdown of -19.38%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CPLS and LRGC.

Drawdown Indicators

	CPLS	LRGC	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-4.43%	-19.38%	+14.95%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-2.47%	-10.00%	+7.53%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.09%	-1.21%	+0.12%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.23%	-2.19%	+0.96%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.82%	2.43%	-1.61%

Volatility

CPLS vs. LRGC - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for AB Core Plus Bond ETF (CPLS) is 1.09%, while AB US Large Cap Strategic Equities ETF (LRGC) has a volatility of 4.37%. This indicates that CPLS experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than LRGC based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	CPLS	LRGC	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.09%	4.37%	-3.28%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	2.96%	9.79%	-6.83%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	3.87%	12.44%	-8.57%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	4.84%	15.28%	-10.44%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	4.84%	15.28%	-10.44%

CPLS vs. LRGC - Expense Ratio Comparison

CPLS has a 0.33% expense ratio, which is lower than LRGC's 0.48% expense ratio.

Dividends

CPLS vs. LRGC - Dividend Comparison

CPLS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.61%, more than LRGC's 0.54% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023
CPLS AB Core Plus Bond ETF	4.61%	4.66%	4.71%	0.23%
LRGC AB US Large Cap Strategic Equities ETF	0.54%	0.58%	0.46%	0.17%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CPLS and LRGC in my portfolio?

CPLS and LRGC have a correlation of 0.37, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, CPLS or LRGC?

LRGC has higher volatility (4.37%) compared to CPLS (1.09%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CPLS dropped -4.43% vs LRGC's -19.38%.

Which ETF is better, CPLS or LRGC?

On 1-year performance, LRGC leads with 22.28% vs 4.59% for CPLS. On fees, CPLS is cheaper at 0.33% per year. On volatility, CPLS has been the lower-risk option at 1.09%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, CPLS or LRGC?

Over the 1-year period, LRGC has performed better with a 22.28% return vs 4.59%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, CPLS or LRGC?

CPLS is cheaper with a 0.33% expense ratio, compared with 0.48% for LRGC.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, CPLS or LRGC?

CPLS has the higher dividend yield at 4.61%, compared with 0.54% for LRGC.

What is the main difference between CPLS and LRGC?

CPLS is categorized as Intermediate Core-Plus Bond, while LRGC is Large Cap Blend Equities. Their fees differ too: 0.33% for CPLS and 0.48% for LRGC.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

LRGC currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.80 vs 1.19), 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.