NCBVX vs. CVGRX

Last updated Jun 13, 2026

NCBVX (PGIM Quant Solutions Mid-Cap Value Fund) and CVGRX (Calamos Growth Fund) are both mutual funds - NCBVX is a Mid Cap Value Equities fund managed by PGIM, while CVGRX is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund managed by Calamos. Over the past 10 years, NCBVX returned 7.98%/yr vs 14.43%/yr for CVGRX. A 0.75 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. NCBVX charges 1.95%/yr vs 1.28%/yr for CVGRX.

Performance

NCBVX vs. CVGRX - Performance Comparison

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, NCBVX achieves a 16.29% return, which is significantly higher than CVGRX's 5.31% return. Over the past 10 years, NCBVX has underperformed CVGRX with an annualized return of 7.98%, while CVGRX has yielded a comparatively higher 14.43% annualized return.

NCBVX

• 1D: 2.05%
• 1M: 4.66%
• YTD: 16.29%
• 6M: 15.32%
• 1Y: 31.86%
• 3Y*: 16.77%
• 5Y*: 7.81%
• 10Y*: 7.98%

CVGRX

• 1D: 2.22%
• 1M: -3.49%
• YTD: 5.31%
• 6M: 5.88%
• 1Y: 21.01%
• 3Y*: 21.43%
• 5Y*: 10.97%
• 10Y*: 14.43%

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

NCBVX vs. CVGRX - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
NCBVX PGIM Quant Solutions Mid-Cap Value Fund	16.29%	11.86%	10.49%	10.40%	-10.18%	33.13%	-7.31%	18.78%	-20.51%	11.63%
CVGRX Calamos Growth Fund	5.31%	16.08%	32.32%	37.64%	-33.33%	23.06%	32.97%	31.11%	-6.14%	26.58%

Correlation

The correlation between NCBVX and CVGRX is 0.54, 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	0.54
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.53
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.63
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.62
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 19, 1998	0.75

Over the past year, the correlation between NCBVX and CVGRX has dropped to 0.54 - well below their long-term average of 0.75, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

Return for Risk

NCBVX vs. CVGRX — Risk / Return Rank

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

NCBVX

NCBVX Risk / Return Rank: 85
NCBVX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 81
NCBVX Sortino Ratio Rank: 80
NCBVX Omega Ratio Rank: 74
NCBVX Calmar Ratio Rank: 94
NCBVX Martin Ratio Rank: 93

CVGRX

CVGRX Risk / Return Rank: 22
CVGRX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 23
CVGRX Sortino Ratio Rank: 22
CVGRX Omega Ratio Rank: 23
CVGRX Calmar Ratio Rank: 18
CVGRX Martin Ratio Rank: 22

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. CVGRX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

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

	NCBVX	CVGRX	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.32	1.14	+1.17
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.29	1.61	+1.68
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.41	1.21	+0.20
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.88	1.24	+3.64
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	17.57	4.55	+13.02

NCBVX vs. CVGRX - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current NCBVX Sharpe Ratio is 2.32, which is higher than the CVGRX Sharpe Ratio of 1.14. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of NCBVX and CVGRX, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

NCBVX vs. CVGRX - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum NCBVX drawdown since its inception was -60.64%, roughly equal to the maximum CVGRX drawdown of -61.65%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for NCBVX and CVGRX.

Drawdown Indicators

	NCBVX	CVGRX	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-60.64%	-61.65%	+1.01%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-6.31%	-16.00%	+9.69%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-21.27%	-23.81%	+2.54%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-23.15%	-37.43%	+14.28%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-57.50%	-37.43%	-20.07%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.15%	-5.34%	+5.19%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-9.09%	-11.50%	+2.41%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.75%	4.33%	-2.58%

Volatility

NCBVX vs. CVGRX - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for PGIM Quant Solutions Mid-Cap Value Fund (NCBVX) is 3.99%, while Calamos Growth Fund (CVGRX) has a volatility of 6.40%. This indicates that NCBVX experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CVGRX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	NCBVX	CVGRX	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.99%	6.40%	-2.41%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	9.85%	13.78%	-3.93%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	13.31%	17.28%	-3.97%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	18.85%	21.93%	-3.08%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	22.67%	21.66%	+1.01%

NCBVX vs. CVGRX - Expense Ratio Comparison

NCBVX has a 1.95% expense ratio, which is higher than CVGRX's 1.28% expense ratio.

Dividends

NCBVX vs. CVGRX - Dividend Comparison

NCBVX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.59%, less than CVGRX's 8.37% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
CVGRX Calamos Growth Fund	8.37%	8.81%	6.66%	4.48%	0.00%	12.17%	11.25%	9.71%	16.86%	13.75%	4.12%	35.24%
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

Can I hold both NCBVX and CVGRX in my portfolio?

NCBVX and CVGRX have a correlation of 0.54, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, NCBVX or CVGRX?

CVGRX has higher volatility (6.40%) compared to NCBVX (3.99%). In terms of maximum drawdown, NCBVX dropped -60.64% vs CVGRX's -61.65%.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

NCBVX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.32 vs 1.14), 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.