LSGGX vs. MBXAX
LSGGX (Loomis Sayles Global Growth Fund) and MBXAX (Catalyst/Millburn Hedge Strategy Fund) are both mutual funds - LSGGX is a Global Equities fund managed by Natixis, while MBXAX is a Multistrategy fund managed by Catalyst Mutual Funds. Over the past 5 years, LSGGX returned 5.09%/yr vs 7.12%/yr for MBXAX. Their 0.46 correlation means their historical movements had little consistent relationship. LSGGX charges 0.95%/yr vs 2.18%/yr for MBXAX.
Performance
LSGGX vs. MBXAX - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, LSGGX achieves a -8.97% return, which is significantly lower than MBXAX's 12.74% return.
LSGGX
- 1D
- 0.09%
- 1M
- -3.12%
- 6M
- -8.60%
- YTD
- -8.97%
- 1Y
- -5.49%
- 3Y*
- 10.39%
- 5Y*
- 5.09%
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- 12.26%
MBXAX
- 1D
- -0.29%
- 1M
- -2.04%
- 6M
- 8.41%
- YTD
- 12.74%
- 1Y
- 17.15%
- 3Y*
- 9.84%
- 5Y*
- 7.12%
- 10Y*
- 7.41%
- ALL TIME*
- 8.86%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $0.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | |
| $0.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 |
LSGGX vs. MBXAX - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
LSGGX Loomis Sayles Global Growth Fund | -8.97% | 16.84% | 23.30% | 36.10% | -25.98% | 5.89% | 35.25% | 30.63% | -6.70% | 31.11% |
MBXAX Catalyst/Millburn Hedge Strategy Fund | 12.74% | 4.13% | 13.17% | -0.91% | 7.46% | 16.62% | -0.72% | 13.59% | -2.43% | 13.69% |
Correlation
The correlation between LSGGX and MBXAX is 0.18, which is low. Their historical price movements had little consistent relationship.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most. | 0.19 |
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history. | 0.25 |
Correlation (5Y) Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period. | 0.31 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 3, 2017 | 0.46 |
Over the past year, the correlation between LSGGX and MBXAX has dropped to 0.18 - well below their long-term average of 0.46, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.
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
LSGGX vs. MBXAX — Risk / Return Rank
LSGGX
MBXAX
LSGGX vs. MBXAX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Loomis Sayles Global Growth Fund (LSGGX) and Catalyst/Millburn Hedge Strategy Fund (MBXAX). 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.
| LSGGX | MBXAX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -2.46 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -3.45 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 0.96 | 1.40 | -0.44 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.29 | 3.77 | -4.06 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -0.64 | 14.56 | -15.20 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
LSGGX vs. MBXAX - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum LSGGX drawdown since its inception was -37.72%, which is greater than MBXAX's maximum drawdown of -31.75%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LSGGX and MBXAX.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| LSGGX | MBXAX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -37.72% | -31.75% | -5.97% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -21.08% | -3.89% | -17.19% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -22.21% | -15.66% | -6.55% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -37.72% | -15.66% | -22.06% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -31.75% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -13.95% | -2.69% | -11.26% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -7.69% | -4.00% | -3.69% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 8.93% | 1.05% | +7.88% |
Volatility
LSGGX vs. MBXAX - Volatility Comparison
Loomis Sayles Global Growth Fund (LSGGX) has a higher volatility of 5.35% compared to Catalyst/Millburn Hedge Strategy Fund (MBXAX) at 1.59%. This indicates that LSGGX's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than MBXAX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| LSGGX | MBXAX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 5.35% | 1.59% | +3.76% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 14.55% | 4.87% | +9.68% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 18.84% | 6.87% | +11.97% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 22.24% | 11.39% | +10.85% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 20.54% | 13.36% | +7.18% |
LSGGX vs. MBXAX - Expense Ratio Comparison
LSGGX has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is lower than MBXAX's 2.18% expense ratio.
Dividends
LSGGX vs. MBXAX - Dividend Comparison
LSGGX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.33%, while MBXAX has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
LSGGX Loomis Sayles Global Growth Fund | 0.33% | 0.30% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 7.77% | 7.38% | 6.15% | 5.74% | 4.78% | 3.44% | 0.00% |
MBXAX Catalyst/Millburn Hedge Strategy Fund | 0.00% | 0.00% | 2.43% | 2.02% | 7.57% | 0.00% | 3.92% | 4.96% | 3.07% | 3.35% | 1.82% |
Frequently Asked Questions
LSGGX and MBXAX have a correlation of 0.18, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
LSGGX has higher volatility (5.35%) compared to MBXAX (1.59%). In terms of maximum drawdown, LSGGX dropped -37.72% vs MBXAX's -31.75%.
MBXAX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.13 vs -0.32), 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 LSGGX and MBXAX
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