HLMGX vs. CSUAX

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

HLMGX (Harding Loevner Global Equity Portfolio) and CSUAX (Cohen & Steers Global Infrastructure Fund Class A) are both Global Equities funds. Over the past 10 years, HLMGX returned 10.35%/yr vs 7.38%/yr for CSUAX. A 0.67 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. HLMGX charges 1.05%/yr vs 1.22%/yr for CSUAX.

Performance

HLMGX vs. CSUAX - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Harding Loevner Global Equity Portfolio (HLMGX) and Cohen & Steers Global Infrastructure Fund Class A (CSUAX). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, HLMGX achieves a 6.56% return, which is significantly lower than CSUAX's 9.47% return. Over the past 10 years, HLMGX has outperformed CSUAX with an annualized return of 10.35%, while CSUAX has yielded a comparatively lower 7.38% annualized return.

HLMGX

• 1D: 0.45%
• 1M: 4.44%
• YTD: 6.56%
• 6M: 6.47%
• 1Y: 14.00%
• 3Y*: 14.14%
• 5Y*: 4.23%
• 10Y*: 10.35%

CSUAX

• 1D: 1.26%
• 1M: -2.22%
• YTD: 9.47%
• 6M: 8.83%
• 1Y: 16.20%
• 3Y*: 11.76%
• 5Y*: 6.74%
• 10Y*: 7.38%

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

HLMGX vs. CSUAX - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
HLMGX Harding Loevner Global Equity Portfolio	6.56%	11.95%	13.50%	21.84%	-30.20%	14.38%	29.68%	28.77%	-10.61%	31.94%
CSUAX Cohen & Steers Global Infrastructure Fund Class A	9.47%	14.30%	8.30%	2.09%	-5.20%	16.24%	-1.65%	24.26%	-5.83%	17.99%

Correlation

The correlation between HLMGX and CSUAX is 0.31, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.31
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.35
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.50
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.55
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 3, 2004	0.67

Over the past year, the correlation between HLMGX and CSUAX has dropped to 0.31 - well below their long-term average of 0.67, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

Return for Risk

HLMGX vs. CSUAX — Risk / Return Rank

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

HLMGX

HLMGX Risk / Return Rank: 15
HLMGX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 15
HLMGX Sortino Ratio Rank: 14
HLMGX Omega Ratio Rank: 14
HLMGX Calmar Ratio Rank: 13
HLMGX Martin Ratio Rank: 19

CSUAX

CSUAX Risk / Return Rank: 40
CSUAX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 35
CSUAX Sortino Ratio Rank: 35
CSUAX Omega Ratio Rank: 33
CSUAX Calmar Ratio Rank: 52
CSUAX Martin Ratio Rank: 44

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.

HLMGX vs. CSUAX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Harding Loevner Global Equity Portfolio (HLMGX) and Cohen & Steers Global Infrastructure Fund Class A (CSUAX). 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.

	HLMGX	CSUAX	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	1.09	1.70	-0.62
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	1.57	2.47	-0.90
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.19	1.30	-0.11
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.23	2.75	-1.52
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	4.98	9.19	-4.21
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

HLMGX vs. CSUAX - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current HLMGX Sharpe Ratio is 1.09, which is lower than the CSUAX Sharpe Ratio of 1.70. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of HLMGX and CSUAX, 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

	HLMGX	CSUAX	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.09	1.70	-0.62
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.23	0.52	-0.29
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.57	0.50	+0.08
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.36	0.55	-0.19

Drawdowns

HLMGX vs. CSUAX - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum HLMGX drawdown since its inception was -54.27%, roughly equal to the maximum CSUAX drawdown of -52.20%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for HLMGX and CSUAX.

Drawdown Indicators

	HLMGX	CSUAX	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-54.27%	-52.20%	-2.07%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-11.28%	-5.99%	-5.29%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-15.76%	-14.95%	-0.81%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-38.48%	-20.45%	-18.03%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-38.48%	-35.05%	-3.43%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	-3.39%	+3.39%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-12.97%	-8.44%	-4.53%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.79%	1.79%	+1.00%

Volatility

HLMGX vs. CSUAX - Volatility Comparison

Harding Loevner Global Equity Portfolio (HLMGX) has a higher volatility of 3.72% compared to Cohen & Steers Global Infrastructure Fund Class A (CSUAX) at 3.14%. This indicates that HLMGX's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CSUAX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	HLMGX	CSUAX	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.72%	3.14%	+0.58%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	10.17%	7.82%	+2.35%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	12.84%	9.68%	+3.16%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	18.24%	12.99%	+5.25%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	18.11%	14.92%	+3.19%

HLMGX vs. CSUAX - Expense Ratio Comparison

HLMGX has a 1.05% expense ratio, which is lower than CSUAX's 1.22% expense ratio.

Dividends

HLMGX vs. CSUAX - Dividend Comparison

HLMGX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 19.70%, more than CSUAX's 7.39% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
CSUAX Cohen & Steers Global Infrastructure Fund Class A	7.39%	8.09%	2.23%	2.17%	3.55%	2.95%	1.30%	1.52%	2.08%	5.00%	2.04%	6.20%
HLMGX Harding Loevner Global Equity Portfolio	19.70%	20.99%	30.72%	0.28%	0.00%	16.22%	5.68%	0.27%	12.74%	13.71%	1.34%	2.81%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both HLMGX and CSUAX in my portfolio?

HLMGX and CSUAX have a correlation of 0.31, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, HLMGX or CSUAX?

HLMGX has higher volatility (3.72%) compared to CSUAX (3.14%). In terms of maximum drawdown, HLMGX dropped -54.27% vs CSUAX's -52.20%.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

CSUAX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.70 vs 1.09), 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.