NIPAX vs. CTCAX
Compare and contrast key facts about Columbia Capital Allocation Moderate Conservative Portfolio (NIPAX) and Columbia Global Technology Growth Fund Class A (CTCAX).
NIPAX is managed by Columbia. It was launched on Oct 14, 1996. CTCAX is managed by Columbia. It was launched on Nov 9, 2000.
Performance
NIPAX vs. CTCAX - Performance Comparison
Loading graphics...
NIPAX vs. CTCAX - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
NIPAX Columbia Capital Allocation Moderate Conservative Portfolio | -3.13% | 13.17% | 8.07% | 12.30% | -15.45% | 7.44% | 10.00% | 14.31% | -4.84% | 9.59% |
CTCAX Columbia Global Technology Growth Fund Class A | -10.22% | 24.78% | 31.39% | 56.46% | -34.81% | 22.73% | 49.46% | 43.91% | -1.48% | 42.99% |
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, NIPAX achieves a -3.13% return, which is significantly higher than CTCAX's -10.22% return. Over the past 10 years, NIPAX has underperformed CTCAX with an annualized return of 5.05%, while CTCAX has yielded a comparatively higher 20.26% annualized return.
NIPAX
- 1D
- 0.20%
- 1M
- -5.46%
- YTD
- -3.13%
- 6M
- -1.29%
- 1Y
- 8.91%
- 3Y*
- 8.31%
- 5Y*
- 3.55%
- 10Y*
- 5.05%
CTCAX
- 1D
- -1.69%
- 1M
- -9.75%
- YTD
- -10.22%
- 6M
- -8.54%
- 1Y
- 27.76%
- 3Y*
- 23.83%
- 5Y*
- 12.52%
- 10Y*
- 20.26%
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
NIPAX vs. CTCAX - Expense Ratio Comparison
NIPAX has a 0.16% expense ratio, which is lower than CTCAX's 1.18% expense ratio.
Return for Risk
NIPAX vs. CTCAX — Risk / Return Rank
NIPAX
CTCAX
NIPAX vs. CTCAX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Columbia Capital Allocation Moderate Conservative Portfolio (NIPAX) and Columbia Global Technology Growth Fund Class A (CTCAX). 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.
| NIPAX | CTCAX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | 1.19 | 1.02 | +0.17 |
Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | 1.69 | 1.57 | +0.13 |
Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.24 | 1.22 | +0.02 |
Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.49 | 1.67 | -0.18 |
Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 6.79 | 5.92 | +0.87 |
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 graphics...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| NIPAX | CTCAX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.19 | 1.02 | +0.17 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.47 | 0.49 | -0.02 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.70 | 0.82 | -0.12 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.84 | 0.70 | +0.14 |
Correlation
The correlation between NIPAX and CTCAX is 0.79, 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
NIPAX vs. CTCAX - Dividend Comparison
NIPAX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.55%, less than CTCAX's 3.66% yield.
| TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
NIPAX Columbia Capital Allocation Moderate Conservative Portfolio | 3.55% | 4.05% | 3.24% | 4.23% | 6.79% | 9.83% | 5.37% | 4.49% | 7.06% | 3.07% | 3.42% | 4.49% |
CTCAX Columbia Global Technology Growth Fund Class A | 3.66% | 3.29% | 1.08% | 2.36% | 3.53% | 4.15% | 0.91% | 2.55% | 5.82% | 3.52% | 0.36% | 1.80% |
Drawdowns
NIPAX vs. CTCAX - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum NIPAX drawdown since its inception was -26.77%, smaller than the maximum CTCAX drawdown of -61.04%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for NIPAX and CTCAX.
Loading graphics...
Drawdown Indicators
| NIPAX | CTCAX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -26.77% | -61.04% | +34.27% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -5.82% | -14.43% | +8.61% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -19.93% | -39.55% | +19.62% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -19.93% | -39.55% | +19.62% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -5.64% | -14.43% | +8.79% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -2.67% | -10.75% | +8.08% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.28% | 4.07% | -2.79% |
Volatility
NIPAX vs. CTCAX - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Columbia Capital Allocation Moderate Conservative Portfolio (NIPAX) is 3.10%, while Columbia Global Technology Growth Fund Class A (CTCAX) has a volatility of 7.45%. This indicates that NIPAX experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CTCAX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading graphics...
Volatility by Period
| NIPAX | CTCAX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 3.10% | 7.45% | -4.35% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 4.83% | 16.24% | -11.41% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 7.60% | 27.00% | -19.40% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 7.62% | 25.81% | -18.19% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 7.22% | 24.66% | -17.44% |