SCZ vs. CGV

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

SCZ (iShares MSCI EAFE Small-Cap ETF) and CGV (Conductor Global Equity Value ETF) are both Foreign Small & Mid Cap Equities funds. SCZ is passively managed, while CGV is actively managed. Over the past 3 years, SCZ returned 16.13%/yr vs 12.42%/yr for CGV. Their correlation of 0.82 suggests significant overlap in exposure. SCZ charges 0.40%/yr vs 1.25%/yr for CGV.

Performance

SCZ vs. CGV - Performance Comparison

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, SCZ achieves a 9.56% return, which is significantly lower than CGV's 12.00% return.

SCZ

• 1D: -0.72%
• 1M: 2.75%
• YTD: 9.56%
• 6M: 12.13%
• 1Y: 24.04%
• 3Y*: 16.13%
• 5Y*: 5.02%
• 10Y*: 8.03%

CGV

• 1D: -1.42%
• 1M: -0.01%
• YTD: 12.00%
• 6M: 14.03%
• 1Y: 27.77%
• 3Y*: 12.42%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

SCZ vs. CGV - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
SCZ iShares MSCI EAFE Small-Cap ETF	9.56%	32.08%	1.52%	12.98%	-3.07%
CGV Conductor Global Equity Value ETF	12.00%	23.11%	-3.34%	5.72%	3.44%

Correlation

The correlation between SCZ and CGV is 0.83, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.83
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.85
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 2, 2022	0.82

The correlation between SCZ and CGV has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.82 to 0.85 - a consistent structural relationship.

SCZ vs. CGV - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	SCZ	CGV
Industrials	24.6%	14.9%
Financial Services	12.5%	4.9%
Consumer Cyclical	11.8%	10.1%
Basic Materials	10.7%	21.1%
Real Estate	10.3%	1.3%
Technology	9.1%	9.3%
Healthcare	5.5%	5.3%
Consumer Defensive	5.0%	14.3%
Communication Services	4.1%	2.2%
Energy	3.7%	12.7%
Utilities	2.8%	3.9%

Return for Risk

SCZ vs. CGV — Risk / Return Rank

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

SCZ

SCZ Risk / Return Rank: 47
SCZ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 47
SCZ Sortino Ratio Rank: 48
SCZ Omega Ratio Rank: 48
SCZ Calmar Ratio Rank: 42
SCZ Martin Ratio Rank: 48

CGV

CGV Risk / Return Rank: 54
CGV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 59
CGV Sortino Ratio Rank: 56
CGV Omega Ratio Rank: 58
CGV Calmar Ratio Rank: 47
CGV Martin Ratio Rank: 50

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.

SCZ vs. CGV - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI EAFE Small-Cap ETF (SCZ) 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.

	SCZ	CGV	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	1.67	1.98	-0.31
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	2.39	2.65	-0.25
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.31	1.35	-0.05
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.11	2.30	-0.19
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	8.08	8.42	-0.34
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

SCZ vs. CGV - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current SCZ Sharpe Ratio is 1.67, which is comparable to the CGV Sharpe Ratio of 1.98. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of SCZ and CGV, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	SCZ	CGV	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.67	1.98	-0.31
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.30	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.46	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.27	0.77	-0.50

Drawdowns

SCZ vs. CGV - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum SCZ drawdown since its inception was -61.86%, which is greater than CGV's maximum drawdown of -16.64%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for SCZ and CGV.

Drawdown Indicators

	SCZ	CGV	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-61.86%	-16.64%	-45.22%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-11.43%	-12.13%	+0.70%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-15.06%	-16.64%	+1.58%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-36.87%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-41.07%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.79%	-3.75%	+1.96%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-13.06%	-3.65%	-9.41%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.98%	3.31%	-0.33%

Volatility

SCZ vs. CGV - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares MSCI EAFE Small-Cap ETF (SCZ) is 4.57%, while Conductor Global Equity Value ETF (CGV) has a volatility of 5.19%. This indicates that SCZ experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CGV based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	SCZ	CGV	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.57%	5.19%	-0.62%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	11.95%	11.66%	+0.29%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	14.47%	14.08%	+0.39%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	16.74%	13.53%	+3.21%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	17.43%	13.53%	+3.90%

SCZ vs. CGV - Expense Ratio Comparison

SCZ has a 0.40% expense ratio, which is lower than CGV's 1.25% expense ratio.

Dividends

SCZ vs. CGV - Dividend Comparison

SCZ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.01%, less than CGV's 4.90% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
CGV Conductor Global Equity Value ETF	4.90%	4.58%	2.87%	4.56%	0.71%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
SCZ iShares MSCI EAFE Small-Cap ETF	3.01%	3.30%	3.50%	2.96%	1.99%	2.96%	1.52%	3.52%	2.79%	2.38%	2.82%	2.06%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both SCZ and CGV in my portfolio?

SCZ and CGV have a correlation of 0.83, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, SCZ or CGV?

CGV has higher volatility (5.19%) compared to SCZ (4.57%). In terms of maximum drawdown, SCZ dropped -61.86% vs CGV's -16.64%.

Which ETF is better, SCZ or CGV?

On 3-year performance, SCZ leads with 16.13% vs 12.42% for CGV. On fees, SCZ is cheaper at 0.40% per year. On volatility, SCZ has been the lower-risk option at 4.57%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, SCZ or CGV?

Over the 3-year period, SCZ has performed better with a 16.13% return vs 12.42%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, SCZ or CGV?

SCZ is cheaper with a 0.40% expense ratio, compared with 1.25% for CGV.

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

CGV has the higher dividend yield at 4.90%, compared with 3.01% for SCZ.

What is the main difference between SCZ and CGV?

They also come from different issuers: iShares and Conductor Fund. Their fees differ too: 0.40% for SCZ and 1.25% for CGV.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

CGV currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.98 vs 1.67), 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.