HWGIX vs. CSUAX

Last updated Jun 3, 2026

HWGIX (Hotchkis & Wiley Global Value Fund) and CSUAX (Cohen & Steers Global Infrastructure Fund Class A) are both Global Equities funds. Over the past 10 years, HWGIX returned 11.05%/yr vs 7.24%/yr for CSUAX. A 0.61 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. HWGIX charges 0.95%/yr vs 1.22%/yr for CSUAX.

Performance

HWGIX vs. CSUAX - Performance Comparison

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

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both investments are quite close, with HWGIX having a 7.97% return and CSUAX slightly higher at 8.11%. Over the past 10 years, HWGIX has outperformed CSUAX with an annualized return of 11.05%, while CSUAX has yielded a comparatively lower 7.24% annualized return.

HWGIX

• 1D: 1.32%
• 1M: 4.76%
• YTD: 7.97%
• 6M: 13.02%
• 1Y: 20.95%
• 3Y*: 19.69%
• 5Y*: 10.61%
• 10Y*: 11.05%

CSUAX

• 1D: -1.25%
• 1M: -3.79%
• YTD: 8.11%
• 6M: 7.64%
• 1Y: 14.89%
• 3Y*: 11.29%
• 5Y*: 6.43%
• 10Y*: 7.24%

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

HWGIX vs. CSUAX - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
HWGIX Hotchkis & Wiley Global Value Fund	7.97%	23.76%	9.46%	28.00%	-11.65%	26.67%	-0.59%	24.57%	-16.08%	16.73%
CSUAX Cohen & Steers Global Infrastructure Fund Class A	8.11%	14.30%	8.30%	2.09%	-5.20%	16.24%	-1.65%	24.26%	-5.83%	17.99%

Correlation

The correlation between HWGIX and CSUAX is 0.43, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.43
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.55
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.61
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.57
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 3, 2013	0.61

The correlation between HWGIX and CSUAX shifts across timeframes, from 0.43 (1 year) to 0.61 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

HWGIX vs. CSUAX — Risk / Return Rank

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

HWGIX

HWGIX Risk / Return Rank: 34
HWGIX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 34
HWGIX Sortino Ratio Rank: 35
HWGIX Omega Ratio Rank: 33
HWGIX Calmar Ratio Rank: 34
HWGIX Martin Ratio Rank: 32

CSUAX

CSUAX Risk / Return Rank: 37
CSUAX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 30
CSUAX Sortino Ratio Rank: 30
CSUAX Omega Ratio Rank: 29
CSUAX Calmar Ratio Rank: 51
CSUAX Martin Ratio Rank: 43

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.

HWGIX vs. CSUAX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Hotchkis & Wiley Global Value Fund (HWGIX) 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.

	HWGIX	CSUAX	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	1.71	1.59	+0.12
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	2.49	2.31	+0.17
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.30	1.28	+0.02
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.22	2.75	-0.53
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	7.48	9.28	-1.80
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

HWGIX vs. CSUAX - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current HWGIX Sharpe Ratio is 1.71, which is comparable to the CSUAX Sharpe Ratio of 1.59. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of HWGIX 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

	HWGIX	CSUAX	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.71	1.59	+0.12
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.61	0.50	+0.11
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.54	0.49	+0.05
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.55	0.55	0.00

Drawdowns

HWGIX vs. CSUAX - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum HWGIX drawdown since its inception was -46.71%, smaller than the maximum CSUAX drawdown of -52.20%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for HWGIX and CSUAX.

Drawdown Indicators

	HWGIX	CSUAX	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-46.71%	-52.20%	+5.49%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-9.83%	-5.99%	-3.84%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-14.17%	-14.95%	+0.78%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-28.63%	-20.45%	-8.18%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-46.71%	-35.05%	-11.66%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	-4.60%	+4.60%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-6.69%	-8.44%	+1.75%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.92%	1.77%	+1.15%

Volatility

HWGIX vs. CSUAX - Volatility Comparison

Hotchkis & Wiley Global Value Fund (HWGIX) has a higher volatility of 2.99% compared to Cohen & Steers Global Infrastructure Fund Class A (CSUAX) at 2.80%. This indicates that HWGIX'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

	HWGIX	CSUAX	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.99%	2.80%	+0.19%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	9.17%	7.81%	+1.36%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	12.60%	9.63%	+2.97%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	17.47%	12.98%	+4.49%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	20.67%	14.92%	+5.75%

HWGIX vs. CSUAX - Expense Ratio Comparison

HWGIX has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is lower than CSUAX's 1.22% expense ratio.

Dividends

HWGIX vs. CSUAX - Dividend Comparison

HWGIX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 8.92%, more than CSUAX's 7.48% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
CSUAX Cohen & Steers Global Infrastructure Fund Class A	7.48%	8.09%	2.23%	2.17%	3.55%	2.95%	1.30%	1.52%	2.08%	5.00%	2.04%	6.20%
HWGIX Hotchkis & Wiley Global Value Fund	8.92%	9.63%	15.10%	11.01%	3.92%	0.68%	1.49%	2.56%	10.34%	5.50%	0.80%	7.06%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both HWGIX and CSUAX in my portfolio?

HWGIX and CSUAX have a correlation of 0.43, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, HWGIX or CSUAX?

HWGIX has higher volatility (2.99%) compared to CSUAX (2.80%). In terms of maximum drawdown, HWGIX dropped -46.71% vs CSUAX's -52.20%.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

HWGIX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.71 vs 1.59), 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.