GHMS vs. CGMS
GHMS (Goose Hollow Multi-Strategy Income ETF) and CGMS (Capital Group U.S. Multi-Sector Income ETF) are both Multisector Bonds funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, GHMS returned 2.58% vs 7.45% for CGMS. At a 0.26 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. GHMS charges 1.20%/yr vs 0.39%/yr for CGMS.
Performance
GHMS vs. CGMS - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
GHMS
- 1D
- 0.00%
- 1M
- 0.00%
- YTD
- 0.00%
- 6M
- 0.00%
- 1Y
- 2.58%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
CGMS
- 1D
- 0.04%
- 1M
- 0.52%
- YTD
- 1.80%
- 6M
- 2.08%
- 1Y
- 7.45%
- 3Y*
- 8.01%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
GHMS vs. CGMS - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
GHMS Goose Hollow Multi-Strategy Income ETF | 0.00% | 5.52% | 2.30% | 3.77% |
CGMS Capital Group U.S. Multi-Sector Income ETF | 1.80% | 7.52% | 7.24% | 5.47% |
Correlation
The correlation between GHMS and CGMS is 0.45, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.45 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 16, 2023 | 0.26 |
The correlation between GHMS and CGMS shifts across timeframes, from 0.26 (all time) to 0.45 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
Return for Risk
GHMS vs. CGMS — Risk / Return Rank
GHMS
CGMS
GHMS vs. CGMS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Goose Hollow Multi-Strategy Income ETF (GHMS) and Capital Group U.S. Multi-Sector Income ETF (CGMS). 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.
| GHMS | CGMS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | 0.66 | 2.19 | -1.53 |
Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | 1.05 | 3.31 | -2.26 |
Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.16 | 1.42 | -0.26 |
Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.65 | 2.93 | -2.28 |
Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 1.70 | 13.15 | -11.45 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| GHMS | CGMS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.66 | 2.19 | -1.53 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.94 | 1.68 | -0.74 |
Drawdowns
GHMS vs. CGMS - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum GHMS drawdown since its inception was -4.73%, which is greater than CGMS's maximum drawdown of -4.08%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GHMS and CGMS.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| GHMS | CGMS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -4.73% | -4.08% | -0.65% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -2.73% | -2.47% | -0.26% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -4.08% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -2.44% | 0.00% | -2.44% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -1.21% | -0.67% | -0.54% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.80% | 0.55% | +1.25% |
Volatility
GHMS vs. CGMS - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Goose Hollow Multi-Strategy Income ETF (GHMS) is 0.00%, while Capital Group U.S. Multi-Sector Income ETF (CGMS) has a volatility of 1.16%. This indicates that GHMS experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CGMS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| GHMS | CGMS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 0.00% | 1.16% | -1.16% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 1.74% | 2.65% | -0.91% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 4.97% | 3.43% | +1.54% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 5.37% | 5.13% | +0.24% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 5.37% | 5.13% | +0.24% |
GHMS vs. CGMS - Expense Ratio Comparison
GHMS has a 1.20% expense ratio, which is higher than CGMS's 0.39% expense ratio.
Dividends
GHMS vs. CGMS - Dividend Comparison
GHMS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.69%, less than CGMS's 6.08% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CGMS Capital Group U.S. Multi-Sector Income ETF | 6.08% | 6.00% | 5.91% | 5.84% | 0.97% |
GHMS Goose Hollow Multi-Strategy Income ETF | 1.69% | 1.69% | 4.48% | 0.29% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
GHMS and CGMS have a correlation of 0.45, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
CGMS has higher volatility (1.16%) compared to GHMS (0.00%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GHMS dropped -4.73% vs CGMS's -4.08%.
On 1-year performance, CGMS leads with 7.45% vs 2.58% for GHMS. On fees, CGMS is cheaper at 0.39% per year. On volatility, GHMS has been the lower-risk option at 0.00%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, CGMS has performed better with a 7.45% return vs 2.58%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
CGMS is cheaper with a 0.39% expense ratio, compared with 1.20% for GHMS.
CGMS has the higher dividend yield at 6.08%, compared with 1.69% for GHMS.
They also come from different issuers: Goose Hollow and Capital Group. Their fees differ too: 1.20% for GHMS and 0.39% for CGMS.
CGMS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.19 vs 0.66), 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.
Find the right allocation for GHMS and CGMS
Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.
Open Portfolio Optimizer