PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
IMRFX vs. CBALX
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

IMRFX vs. CBALX - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Columbia Global Opportunities Fund (IMRFX) and Columbia Balanced Fund (CBALX). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

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

IMRFX vs. CBALX - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
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

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

IMRFX
IMRFX Risk / Return Rank: 4444
Overall Rank
IMRFX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4545
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IMRFX Sortino Ratio Rank: 4343
Sortino Ratio Rank
IMRFX Omega Ratio Rank: 4646
Omega Ratio Rank
IMRFX Calmar Ratio Rank: 3838
Calmar Ratio Rank
IMRFX Martin Ratio Rank: 4848
Martin Ratio Rank

CBALX
CBALX Risk / Return Rank: 5151
Overall Rank
CBALX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5151
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CBALX Sortino Ratio Rank: 5050
Sortino Ratio Rank
CBALX Omega Ratio Rank: 5050
Omega Ratio Rank
CBALX Calmar Ratio Rank: 5050
Calmar Ratio Rank
CBALX Martin Ratio Rank: 5757
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.

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.


IMRFXCBALXDifference
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

IMRFX vs. CBALX - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IMRFX Sharpe Ratio is 1.83, which is comparable to the CBALX Sharpe Ratio of 1.94. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IMRFX and CBALX, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


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


IMRFXCBALXDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest 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 Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.77%

-1.26%

+0.49%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-7.32%

-5.30%

-2.02%

Ulcer Index

Depth 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


IMRFXCBALXDifference

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.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
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.

Portfolio Optimizer

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