PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
MFUL vs. CGBL
Performance
Return for Risk
Dividends
Drawdowns
Volatility

Performance

MFUL vs. CGBL - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Mindful Conservative ETF (MFUL) and Capital Group Core Balanced ETF (CGBL). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading graphics...

MFUL vs. CGBL - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023
MFUL
Mindful Conservative ETF
-0.53%4.51%5.36%3.54%
CGBL
Capital Group Core Balanced ETF
-2.24%15.33%16.64%9.80%

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, MFUL achieves a -0.53% return, which is significantly higher than CGBL's -2.24% return.


MFUL

1D
0.74%
1M
-2.62%
YTD
-0.53%
6M
-0.41%
1Y
3.24%
3Y*
3.76%
5Y*
10Y*

CGBL

1D
2.25%
1M
-5.47%
YTD
-2.24%
6M
0.11%
1Y
13.35%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.


MFUL vs. CGBL - Expense Ratio Comparison

MFUL has a 1.10% expense ratio, which is higher than CGBL's 0.33% expense ratio.


Return for Risk

MFUL vs. CGBL — Risk / Return Rank

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

MFUL
MFUL Risk / Return Rank: 3535
Overall Rank
MFUL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3636
Sharpe Ratio Rank
MFUL Sortino Ratio Rank: 3232
Sortino Ratio Rank
MFUL Omega Ratio Rank: 3434
Omega Ratio Rank
MFUL Calmar Ratio Rank: 3636
Calmar Ratio Rank
MFUL Martin Ratio Rank: 3636
Martin Ratio Rank

CGBL
CGBL Risk / Return Rank: 6767
Overall Rank
CGBL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6464
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CGBL Sortino Ratio Rank: 6666
Sortino Ratio Rank
CGBL Omega Ratio Rank: 6565
Omega Ratio Rank
CGBL Calmar Ratio Rank: 7070
Calmar Ratio Rank
CGBL Martin Ratio Rank: 7272
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.

MFUL vs. CGBL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Mindful Conservative ETF (MFUL) and Capital Group Core Balanced ETF (CGBL). 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.


MFULCGBLDifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

0.69

1.08

-0.40

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

0.94

1.61

-0.67

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

1.14

1.23

-0.09

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

0.94

1.70

-0.76

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

3.33

6.99

-3.66

MFUL vs. CGBL - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MFUL Sharpe Ratio is 0.69, which is lower than the CGBL Sharpe Ratio of 1.08. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MFUL and CGBL, offering insights into how both investments have performed under varying market conditions. These values are calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months.


Loading graphics...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


MFULCGBLDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.69

1.08

-0.40

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

-0.20

1.45

-1.64

Correlation

The correlation between MFUL and CGBL is 0.81, which is considered to be high. That indicates a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Having highly-correlated positions in a portfolio may signal a lack of diversification, potentially leading to increased risk during market downturns.


Dividends

MFUL vs. CGBL - Dividend Comparison

MFUL's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.13%, more than CGBL's 2.04% yield.


TTM2025202420232022
MFUL
Mindful Conservative ETF
3.13%3.31%2.59%5.00%0.29%
CGBL
Capital Group Core Balanced ETF
2.04%1.98%1.92%0.48%0.00%

Drawdowns

MFUL vs. CGBL - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MFUL drawdown since its inception was -16.41%, which is greater than CGBL's maximum drawdown of -11.66%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MFUL and CGBL.


Loading graphics...

Drawdown Indicators


MFULCGBLDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-16.41%

-11.66%

-4.75%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-3.77%

-8.11%

+4.34%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-4.13%

-5.81%

+1.68%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-9.80%

-1.30%

-8.50%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.06%

1.98%

-0.92%

Volatility

MFUL vs. CGBL - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Mindful Conservative ETF (MFUL) is 1.89%, while Capital Group Core Balanced ETF (CGBL) has a volatility of 4.61%. This indicates that MFUL experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CGBL based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading graphics...

Volatility by Period


MFULCGBLDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

1.89%

4.61%

-2.72%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

3.10%

7.38%

-4.28%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

4.75%

12.41%

-7.66%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

4.22%

11.01%

-6.79%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

4.22%

11.01%

-6.79%