PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
NCBVX vs. CISMX
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

NCBVX vs. CISMX - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in PGIM Quant Solutions Mid-Cap Value Fund (NCBVX) and Clarkston Partners Fund (CISMX). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, NCBVX achieves a 16.11% return, which is significantly higher than CISMX's -1.51% return. Over the past 10 years, NCBVX has outperformed CISMX with an annualized return of 7.77%, while CISMX has yielded a comparatively lower 5.86% annualized return.


NCBVX

1D
0.31%
1M
2.91%
YTD
16.11%
6M
16.27%
1Y
31.39%
3Y*
17.63%
5Y*
7.64%
10Y*
7.77%

CISMX

1D
-1.04%
1M
-0.56%
YTD
-1.51%
6M
-1.32%
1Y
-0.79%
3Y*
-0.37%
5Y*
-2.04%
10Y*
5.86%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

NCBVX vs. CISMX - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
NCBVX
PGIM Quant Solutions Mid-Cap Value Fund
16.11%11.86%10.49%10.40%-10.18%33.13%-7.31%18.78%-20.51%11.63%
CISMX
Clarkston Partners Fund
-1.51%-8.37%4.49%6.41%-0.40%7.94%17.42%23.98%-7.25%12.84%

Correlation

The correlation between NCBVX and CISMX is 0.70, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.70

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.78

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.84

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.85

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 23, 2015

0.86

The correlation between NCBVX and CISMX shifts across timeframes, from 0.70 (1 year) to 0.86 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

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

NCBVX vs. CISMX — Risk / Return Rank

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

NCBVX
NCBVX Risk / Return Rank: 7676
Overall Rank
NCBVX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6969
Sharpe Ratio Rank
NCBVX Sortino Ratio Rank: 6969
Sortino Ratio Rank
NCBVX Omega Ratio Rank: 6060
Omega Ratio Rank
NCBVX Calmar Ratio Rank: 9292
Calmar Ratio Rank
NCBVX Martin Ratio Rank: 9191
Martin Ratio Rank

CISMX
CISMX Risk / Return Rank: 22
Overall Rank
CISMX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 22
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CISMX Sortino Ratio Rank: 22
Sortino Ratio Rank
CISMX Omega Ratio Rank: 22
Omega Ratio Rank
CISMX Calmar Ratio Rank: 22
Calmar Ratio Rank
CISMX Martin Ratio Rank: 22
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.

NCBVX vs. CISMX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for PGIM Quant Solutions Mid-Cap Value Fund (NCBVX) and Clarkston Partners Fund (CISMX). 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.


NCBVXCISMXDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+2.45

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+3.38

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.42

1.00

+0.42

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

4.89

-0.12

+5.01

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

17.74

-0.27

+18.00

NCBVX vs. CISMX - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current NCBVX Sharpe Ratio is 2.38, which is higher than the CISMX Sharpe Ratio of -0.07. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of NCBVX and CISMX, 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...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


NCBVXCISMXDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.38

-0.07

+2.45

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.41

-0.12

+0.53

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.34

0.32

+0.02

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.41

0.36

+0.06

Drawdowns

NCBVX vs. CISMX - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum NCBVX drawdown since its inception was -60.64%, which is greater than CISMX's maximum drawdown of -33.80%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for NCBVX and CISMX.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


NCBVXCISMXDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-60.64%

-33.80%

-26.84%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-6.31%

-10.54%

+4.23%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-21.27%

-21.19%

-0.08%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-23.15%

-21.19%

-1.96%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-57.50%

-33.80%

-23.70%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

0.00%

-15.70%

+15.70%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-9.10%

-6.70%

-2.40%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.74%

4.70%

-2.96%

Volatility

NCBVX vs. CISMX - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for PGIM Quant Solutions Mid-Cap Value Fund (NCBVX) is 3.47%, while Clarkston Partners Fund (CISMX) has a volatility of 4.62%. This indicates that NCBVX experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CISMX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


NCBVXCISMXDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.47%

4.62%

-1.15%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

9.39%

12.73%

-3.34%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

13.02%

17.07%

-4.05%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

18.81%

17.49%

+1.32%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

22.67%

18.29%

+4.38%

NCBVX vs. CISMX - Expense Ratio Comparison

NCBVX has a 1.95% expense ratio, which is higher than CISMX's 1.00% expense ratio.


Dividends

NCBVX vs. CISMX - Dividend Comparison

NCBVX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.59%, less than CISMX's 4.72% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
CISMX
Clarkston Partners Fund
4.72%4.65%1.05%3.76%16.95%0.81%3.73%3.79%7.15%1.30%1.17%0.09%
NCBVX
PGIM Quant Solutions Mid-Cap Value Fund
0.59%0.68%1.03%1.59%1.17%0.74%1.60%1.93%13.70%6.69%2.83%7.89%

Frequently Asked Questions


NCBVX and CISMX have a correlation of 0.70, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

CISMX has higher volatility (4.62%) compared to NCBVX (3.47%). In terms of maximum drawdown, NCBVX dropped -60.64% vs CISMX's -33.80%.

NCBVX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.38 vs -0.07), 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 NCBVX and CISMX

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