IMRFX vs. CBALX
IMRFX (Columbia Global Opportunities Fund) and CBALX (Columbia Balanced Fund) are both mutual funds - IMRFX is a Global Allocation fund managed by Columbia, while CBALX is a Diversified Portfolio fund managed by Columbia. Over the past 10 years, IMRFX returned 6.17%/yr vs 10.22%/yr for CBALX. Their correlation of 0.93 suggests significant overlap in exposure. IMRFX charges 1.15%/yr vs 0.67%/yr for CBALX.
Performance
IMRFX vs. CBALX - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, IMRFX achieves a 6.33% return, which is significantly higher than CBALX's 5.48% return. Over the past 10 years, IMRFX has underperformed CBALX with an annualized return of 6.17%, while CBALX has yielded a comparatively higher 10.22% annualized return.
IMRFX
- 1D
- -0.07%
- 1M
- 1.08%
- YTD
- 6.33%
- 6M
- 5.94%
- 1Y
- 17.31%
- 3Y*
- 11.67%
- 5Y*
- 3.22%
- 10Y*
- 6.17%
CBALX
- 1D
- -0.52%
- 1M
- 0.72%
- YTD
- 5.48%
- 6M
- 5.08%
- 1Y
- 16.33%
- 3Y*
- 14.46%
- 5Y*
- 8.06%
- 10Y*
- 10.22%
IMRFX vs. CBALX - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
IMRFX Columbia Global Opportunities Fund | 6.33% | 15.88% | 7.46% | 11.29% | -21.02% | 6.25% | 12.55% | 15.62% | -7.03% | 18.17% |
CBALX Columbia Balanced Fund | 5.48% | 14.14% | 14.60% | 21.49% | -16.63% | 14.92% | 17.91% | 23.05% | -5.75% | 14.29% |
Correlation
The correlation between IMRFX and CBALX is 0.91, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.91 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.92 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.92 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.90 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 20, 1996 | 0.93 |
The correlation between IMRFX and CBALX has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.90 to 0.93 - a consistent structural relationship.
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
IMRFX vs. CBALX — Risk / Return Rank
IMRFX
CBALX
IMRFX vs. CBALX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Columbia Global Opportunities Fund (IMRFX) and Columbia Balanced Fund (CBALX). 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.
Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.
| IMRFX | CBALX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.12 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.19 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.35 | 1.36 | -0.01 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.24 | 2.58 | -0.34 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 9.47 | 10.75 | -1.28 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
IMRFX vs. CBALX - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum IMRFX drawdown since its inception was -45.67%, which is greater than CBALX's maximum drawdown of -34.53%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IMRFX and CBALX.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| IMRFX | CBALX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -45.67% | -34.53% | -11.14% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -8.07% | -6.63% | -1.44% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -10.19% | -12.06% | +1.87% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -28.77% | -20.91% | -7.86% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -28.77% | -22.73% | -6.04% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.77% | -1.26% | +0.49% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -7.32% | -5.30% | -2.02% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.90% | 1.59% | +0.31% |
Volatility
IMRFX vs. CBALX - Volatility Comparison
Columbia Global Opportunities Fund (IMRFX) and Columbia Balanced Fund (CBALX) have volatilities of 3.65% and 3.69%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| IMRFX | CBALX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 3.65% | 3.69% | -0.04% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 8.34% | 7.10% | +1.24% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 9.89% | 8.81% | +1.08% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 11.00% | 11.17% | -0.17% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 10.46% | 11.39% | -0.93% |
IMRFX vs. CBALX - Expense Ratio Comparison
IMRFX has a 1.15% expense ratio, which is higher than CBALX's 0.67% expense ratio.
Dividends
IMRFX vs. CBALX - Dividend Comparison
IMRFX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 16.81%, more than CBALX's 6.22% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CBALX Columbia Balanced Fund | 6.22% | 6.42% | 7.83% | 1.84% | 5.36% | 9.26% | 5.31% | 4.16% | 5.82% | 2.79% | 1.60% | 4.05% |
IMRFX Columbia Global Opportunities Fund | 16.81% | 17.87% | 0.47% | 0.00% | 6.62% | 7.92% | 4.40% | 1.75% | 0.35% | 0.00% | 2.77% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
With a correlation of 0.91, IMRFX and CBALX move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.
CBALX has higher volatility (3.69%) compared to IMRFX (3.65%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IMRFX dropped -45.67% vs CBALX's -34.53%.
CBALX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.94 vs 1.83), 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 IMRFX and CBALX
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