CVGRX vs. NCBVX

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

CVGRX (Calamos Growth Fund) and NCBVX (PGIM Quant Solutions Mid-Cap Value Fund) are both mutual funds - CVGRX is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund managed by Calamos, while NCBVX is a Mid Cap Value Equities fund managed by PGIM. Over the past 10 years, CVGRX returned 14.69%/yr vs 7.77%/yr for NCBVX. A 0.75 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. CVGRX charges 1.28%/yr vs 1.95%/yr for NCBVX.

Performance

CVGRX vs. NCBVX - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Calamos Growth Fund (CVGRX) and PGIM Quant Solutions Mid-Cap Value Fund (NCBVX). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CVGRX achieves a 9.58% return, which is significantly lower than NCBVX's 16.11% return. Over the past 10 years, CVGRX has outperformed NCBVX with an annualized return of 14.69%, while NCBVX has yielded a comparatively lower 7.77% annualized return.

CVGRX

• 1D: -1.39%
• 1M: 4.79%
• YTD: 9.58%
• 6M: 8.63%
• 1Y: 25.39%
• 3Y*: 23.68%
• 5Y*: 12.17%
• 10Y*: 14.69%

NCBVX

• 1D: 0.31%
• 1M: 2.91%
• YTD: 16.11%
• 6M: 16.27%
• 1Y: 31.39%
• 3Y*: 17.63%
• 5Y*: 7.64%
• 10Y*: 7.77%

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

CVGRX vs. NCBVX - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
CVGRX Calamos Growth Fund	9.58%	16.08%	32.32%	37.64%	-33.33%	23.06%	32.97%	31.11%	-6.14%	26.58%
NCBVX PGIM Quant Solutions Mid-Cap Value Fund	16.11%	11.86%	10.49%	10.40%	-10.18%	33.13%	-7.31%	18.78%	-20.51%	11.63%

Correlation

The correlation between CVGRX and NCBVX is 0.53, 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	0.53
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.52
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.63
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.62
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 20, 1998	0.75

Over the past year, the correlation between CVGRX and NCBVX has dropped to 0.53 - well below their long-term average of 0.75, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

Return for Risk

CVGRX vs. NCBVX — Risk / Return Rank

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

CVGRX

CVGRX Risk / Return Rank: 28
CVGRX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 32
CVGRX Sortino Ratio Rank: 29
CVGRX Omega Ratio Rank: 30
CVGRX Calmar Ratio Rank: 21
CVGRX Martin Ratio Rank: 27

NCBVX

NCBVX Risk / Return Rank: 76
NCBVX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 69
NCBVX Sortino Ratio Rank: 69
NCBVX Omega Ratio Rank: 60
NCBVX Calmar Ratio Rank: 92
NCBVX Martin Ratio Rank: 91

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.

CVGRX vs. NCBVX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Calamos Growth Fund (CVGRX) and PGIM Quant Solutions Mid-Cap Value Fund (NCBVX). 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.

	CVGRX	NCBVX	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.60	2.38	-0.78
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.20	3.39	-1.19
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.28	1.42	-0.14
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.65	4.89	-3.24
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	6.20	17.74	-11.54
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

CVGRX vs. NCBVX - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CVGRX Sharpe Ratio is 1.60, which is lower than the NCBVX Sharpe Ratio of 2.38. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CVGRX and NCBVX, 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

	CVGRX	NCBVX	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.60	2.38	-0.78
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.56	0.41	+0.15
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.68	0.34	+0.34
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.51	0.41	+0.10

Drawdowns

CVGRX vs. NCBVX - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CVGRX drawdown since its inception was -61.65%, roughly equal to the maximum NCBVX drawdown of -60.64%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CVGRX and NCBVX.

Drawdown Indicators

	CVGRX	NCBVX	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-61.65%	-60.64%	-1.01%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-16.00%	-6.31%	-9.69%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-23.81%	-21.27%	-2.54%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-37.43%	-23.15%	-14.28%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-37.43%	-57.50%	+20.07%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.50%	0.00%	-1.50%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-11.50%	-9.10%	-2.40%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.26%	1.74%	+2.52%

Volatility

CVGRX vs. NCBVX - Volatility Comparison

Calamos Growth Fund (CVGRX) has a higher volatility of 4.04% compared to PGIM Quant Solutions Mid-Cap Value Fund (NCBVX) at 3.47%. This indicates that CVGRX's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than NCBVX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	CVGRX	NCBVX	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.04%	3.47%	+0.57%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	12.79%	9.39%	+3.40%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	16.54%	13.02%	+3.52%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	21.82%	18.81%	+3.01%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	21.61%	22.67%	-1.06%

CVGRX vs. NCBVX - Expense Ratio Comparison

CVGRX has a 1.28% expense ratio, which is lower than NCBVX's 1.95% expense ratio.

Dividends

CVGRX vs. NCBVX - Dividend Comparison

CVGRX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 8.04%, more than NCBVX's 0.59% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
CVGRX Calamos Growth Fund	8.04%	8.81%	6.66%	4.48%	0.00%	12.17%	11.25%	9.71%	16.86%	13.75%	4.12%	35.24%
NCBVX PGIM Quant Solutions Mid-Cap Value Fund	0.59%	0.68%	1.03%	1.59%	1.17%	0.74%	1.60%	1.93%	13.70%	6.69%	2.83%	7.89%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CVGRX and NCBVX in my portfolio?

CVGRX and NCBVX have a correlation of 0.53, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, CVGRX or NCBVX?

CVGRX has higher volatility (4.04%) compared to NCBVX (3.47%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CVGRX dropped -61.65% vs NCBVX's -60.64%.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

NCBVX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.38 vs 1.60), 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.