PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
EAOA vs. CGBL
Performance
Return for Risk
Dividends
Drawdowns
Volatility

Performance

EAOA vs. CGBL - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares ESG Aware Aggressive Allocation ETF (EAOA) and Capital Group Core Balanced ETF (CGBL). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading graphics...

EAOA vs. CGBL - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023
EAOA
iShares ESG Aware Aggressive Allocation ETF
-1.25%18.41%13.79%10.20%
CGBL
Capital Group Core Balanced ETF
-1.67%15.33%16.64%9.80%

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, EAOA achieves a -1.25% return, which is significantly higher than CGBL's -1.67% return.


EAOA

1D
0.81%
1M
-4.05%
YTD
-1.25%
6M
0.95%
1Y
17.60%
3Y*
13.92%
5Y*
7.15%
10Y*

CGBL

1D
0.58%
1M
-4.69%
YTD
-1.67%
6M
0.29%
1Y
13.65%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.


EAOA vs. CGBL - Expense Ratio Comparison

EAOA has a 0.18% expense ratio, which is lower than CGBL's 0.33% expense ratio.


Return for Risk

EAOA vs. CGBL — Risk / Return Rank

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

EAOA
EAOA Risk / Return Rank: 6969
Overall Rank
EAOA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6868
Sharpe Ratio Rank
EAOA Sortino Ratio Rank: 7070
Sortino Ratio Rank
EAOA Omega Ratio Rank: 6969
Omega Ratio Rank
EAOA Calmar Ratio Rank: 6767
Calmar Ratio Rank
EAOA Martin Ratio Rank: 7373
Martin Ratio Rank

CGBL
CGBL Risk / Return Rank: 6363
Overall Rank
CGBL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6060
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CGBL Sortino Ratio Rank: 6363
Sortino Ratio Rank
CGBL Omega Ratio Rank: 6161
Omega Ratio Rank
CGBL Calmar Ratio Rank: 6565
Calmar Ratio Rank
CGBL Martin Ratio Rank: 6666
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

EAOA vs. CGBL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares ESG Aware Aggressive Allocation ETF (EAOA) and Capital Group Core Balanced ETF (CGBL). 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.


EAOACGBLDifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

1.25

1.10

+0.15

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

1.83

1.64

+0.19

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

1.26

1.23

+0.03

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

1.81

1.73

+0.08

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

8.18

7.00

+1.18

EAOA vs. CGBL - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EAOA Sharpe Ratio is 1.25, which is comparable to the CGBL Sharpe Ratio of 1.10. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EAOA and CGBL, offering insights into how both investments have performed under varying market conditions. These values are calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months.


Loading graphics...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


EAOACGBLDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.25

1.10

+0.15

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.54

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.80

1.47

-0.67

Correlation

The correlation between EAOA and CGBL is 0.93, which is considered to be high. That indicates a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Having highly-correlated positions in a portfolio may signal a lack of diversification, potentially leading to increased risk during market downturns.


Dividends

EAOA vs. CGBL - Dividend Comparison

EAOA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.12%, more than CGBL's 2.03% yield.


TTM202520242023202220212020
EAOA
iShares ESG Aware Aggressive Allocation ETF
2.12%2.10%2.09%2.21%1.93%1.48%1.12%
CGBL
Capital Group Core Balanced ETF
2.03%1.98%1.92%0.48%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Drawdowns

EAOA vs. CGBL - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EAOA drawdown since its inception was -25.06%, which is greater than CGBL's maximum drawdown of -11.66%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EAOA and CGBL.


Loading graphics...

Drawdown Indicators


EAOACGBLDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-25.06%

-11.66%

-13.40%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-9.98%

-8.11%

-1.87%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-25.06%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-5.15%

-5.26%

+0.11%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-5.44%

-1.31%

-4.13%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.21%

2.00%

+0.21%

Volatility

EAOA vs. CGBL - Volatility Comparison

iShares ESG Aware Aggressive Allocation ETF (EAOA) has a higher volatility of 5.24% compared to Capital Group Core Balanced ETF (CGBL) at 4.54%. This indicates that EAOA's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CGBL based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading graphics...

Volatility by Period


EAOACGBLDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

5.24%

4.54%

+0.70%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

8.43%

7.40%

+1.03%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

14.10%

12.41%

+1.69%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

13.19%

11.01%

+2.18%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

13.17%

11.01%

+2.16%