MGNR vs. ACLO
MGNR (American Beacon GLG Natural Resources ETF) and ACLO (TCW AAA CLO ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - MGNR is a Energy Equities fund actively managed by American Beacon, while ACLO is a CLO fund actively managed by TCW. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, MGNR returned 74.12% vs 5.31% for ACLO. At a correlation of -0.04, they often move in opposite directions. MGNR charges 0.75%/yr vs 0.20%/yr for ACLO.
Performance
MGNR vs. ACLO - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, MGNR achieves a 25.90% return, which is significantly higher than ACLO's 2.21% return.
MGNR
- 1D
- -1.76%
- 1M
- 3.52%
- YTD
- 25.90%
- 6M
- 27.71%
- 1Y
- 74.12%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
ACLO
- 1D
- 0.02%
- 1M
- 0.42%
- YTD
- 2.21%
- 6M
- 2.58%
- 1Y
- 5.31%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
MGNR vs. ACLO - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | |
|---|---|---|---|
MGNR American Beacon GLG Natural Resources ETF | 25.90% | 50.57% | -5.73% |
ACLO TCW AAA CLO ETF | 2.21% | 5.32% | 0.81% |
Correlation
The correlation between MGNR and ACLO is -0.07, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | -0.07 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 19, 2024 | -0.04 |
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
MGNR vs. ACLO — Risk / Return Rank
MGNR
ACLO
MGNR vs. ACLO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for American Beacon GLG Natural Resources ETF (MGNR) and TCW AAA CLO ETF (ACLO). 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.
| MGNR | ACLO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -4.06 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -11.07 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.53 | 3.41 | -1.88 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 6.02 | 19.90 | -13.88 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 24.36 | 164.37 | -140.01 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| MGNR | ACLO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 3.24 | 7.29 | -4.06 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 1.77 | 5.10 | -3.33 |
Drawdowns
MGNR vs. ACLO - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum MGNR drawdown since its inception was -22.06%, which is greater than ACLO's maximum drawdown of -1.01%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MGNR and ACLO.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| MGNR | ACLO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -22.06% | -1.01% | -21.05% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -12.38% | -0.27% | -12.11% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -1.76% | 0.00% | -1.76% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -3.86% | -0.05% | -3.81% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.05% | 0.03% | +3.02% |
Volatility
MGNR vs. ACLO - Volatility Comparison
American Beacon GLG Natural Resources ETF (MGNR) has a higher volatility of 6.59% compared to TCW AAA CLO ETF (ACLO) at 0.14%. This indicates that MGNR's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than ACLO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| MGNR | ACLO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 6.59% | 0.14% | +6.45% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 17.67% | 0.57% | +17.10% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 23.04% | 0.73% | +22.31% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 25.03% | 1.08% | +23.95% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 25.03% | 1.08% | +23.95% |
MGNR vs. ACLO - Expense Ratio Comparison
MGNR has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is higher than ACLO's 0.20% expense ratio.
Dividends
MGNR vs. ACLO - Dividend Comparison
MGNR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.07%, less than ACLO's 4.91% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 |
|---|---|---|---|
ACLO TCW AAA CLO ETF | 4.91% | 4.87% | 0.59% |
MGNR American Beacon GLG Natural Resources ETF | 1.07% | 1.17% | 0.79% |
Frequently Asked Questions
MGNR and ACLO have a correlation of -0.07, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
MGNR has higher volatility (6.59%) compared to ACLO (0.14%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MGNR dropped -22.06% vs ACLO's -1.01%.
On 1-year performance, MGNR leads with 74.12% vs 5.31% for ACLO. On fees, ACLO is cheaper at 0.20% per year. On volatility, ACLO has been the lower-risk option at 0.14%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, MGNR has performed better with a 74.12% return vs 5.31%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
ACLO is cheaper with a 0.20% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for MGNR.
ACLO has the higher dividend yield at 4.91%, compared with 1.07% for MGNR.
MGNR is categorized as Energy Equities, while ACLO is CLO. They also come from different issuers: American Beacon and TCW. Their fees differ too: 0.75% for MGNR and 0.20% for ACLO.
ACLO currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (7.29 vs 3.24), 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 MGNR and ACLO
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