NISM vs. CGV

Last updated Jul 28, 2026

NISM (NYLI International Small-Mid Cap Equity ETF) and CGV (Conductor Global Equity Value ETF) are both Foreign Small & Mid Cap Equities funds. Both are actively managed. Their 0.72 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. NISM charges 0.70%/yr vs 1.25%/yr for CGV.

Performance

NISM vs. CGV - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in NYLI International Small-Mid Cap Equity ETF (NISM) and Conductor Global Equity Value ETF (CGV). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

NISM

• 1D: 0.88%
• 1M: 0.67%
• 6M: —
• YTD: —
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: —

CGV

• 1D: -0.42%
• 1M: 0.01%
• 6M: -1.55%
• YTD: 7.51%
• 1Y: 17.18%
• 3Y*: 9.81%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 8.84%

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
CGV Conductor Global Equity Value ETF	$221.95K	$218.80K	$308.00K
NISM NYLI International Small-Mid Cap Equity ETF	$2.01K	$15.28K	$8.22K

NISM vs. CGV - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)
NISM NYLI International Small-Mid Cap Equity ETF	-1.67%
CGV Conductor Global Equity Value ETF	-6.28%

Correlation

The correlation between NISM and CGV is 0.72, which is moderate. They have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently, sharing some price drivers without tracking each other closely.

	Correlation
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 13, 2026	0.72

Return for Risk

NISM vs. CGV — Risk / Return Rank

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

NISM

Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.

CGV

CGV Risk / Return Rank: 44
CGV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 48
CGV Sortino Ratio Rank: 45
CGV Omega Ratio Rank: 47
CGV Calmar Ratio Rank: 40
CGV Martin Ratio Rank: 38

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.

NISM vs. CGV - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for NYLI International Small-Mid Cap Equity ETF (NISM) and Conductor Global Equity Value ETF (CGV). 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.

	NISM	CGV	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	—	1.16	—
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	—	1.64	—
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	—	1.21	—
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	—	1.42	—
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	—	4.04	—

Drawdowns

NISM vs. CGV - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum NISM drawdown since its inception was -4.35%, smaller than the maximum CGV drawdown of -16.64%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for NISM and CGV.

Drawdown Indicators

	NISM	CGV	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-4.35%	-16.64%	+12.29%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	—	-12.13%	—
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-16.64%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.74%	-7.61%	+5.87%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.84%	-3.77%	+1.93%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	—	4.27%	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	NISM	CGV	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	—	3.02%	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	—	12.66%	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	13.85%	14.86%	-1.01%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	13.85%	13.62%	+0.23%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	13.85%	13.62%	+0.23%

NISM vs. CGV - Expense Ratio Comparison

NISM has a 0.70% expense ratio, which is lower than CGV's 1.25% expense ratio.

Dividends

NISM vs. CGV - Dividend Comparison

NISM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.24%, less than CGV's 4.87% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022
CGV Conductor Global Equity Value ETF	4.87%	4.58%	2.87%	4.56%	0.71%
NISM NYLI International Small-Mid Cap Equity ETF	0.24%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both NISM and CGV in my portfolio?

NISM and CGV have a correlation of 0.72, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, NISM or CGV?

On fees, NISM is cheaper at 0.70% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, NISM or CGV?

NISM is cheaper with a 0.70% expense ratio, compared with 1.25% for CGV.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, NISM or CGV?

CGV has the higher dividend yield at 4.87%, compared with 0.24% for NISM.

What is the main difference between NISM and CGV?

They also come from different issuers: New York Life Investment Management and Conductor Fund. Their fees differ too: 0.70% for NISM and 1.25% for CGV.