SLDR vs. CGSD

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

SLDR (Global X Short-Term Treasury Ladder ETF) and CGSD (Capital Group Short Duration Income ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - SLDR is a Government Bonds fund tracking the FTSE US Treasury 1-3 Years Laddered Bond Index, while CGSD is a Short-Term Bond fund actively managed by Capital Group. SLDR is passively managed, while CGSD is actively managed. Over the past year, SLDR returned 3.14% vs 4.30% for CGSD. A 0.72 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. SLDR charges 0.12%/yr vs 0.25%/yr for CGSD.

Performance

SLDR vs. CGSD - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Global X Short-Term Treasury Ladder ETF (SLDR) and Capital Group Short Duration Income ETF (CGSD). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, SLDR achieves a 0.31% return, which is significantly lower than CGSD's 0.70% return.

SLDR

• 1D: -0.04%
• 1M: 0.13%
• YTD: 0.31%
• 6M: 0.69%
• 1Y: 3.14%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

CGSD

• 1D: -0.10%
• 1M: 0.14%
• YTD: 0.70%
• 6M: 1.09%
• 1Y: 4.30%
• 3Y*: 5.21%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

SLDR vs. CGSD - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
SLDR Global X Short-Term Treasury Ladder ETF	0.31%	4.60%	0.61%
CGSD Capital Group Short Duration Income ETF	0.70%	6.11%	0.59%

Correlation

The correlation between SLDR and CGSD is 0.74, 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	0.74
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 11, 2024	0.72

The correlation between SLDR and CGSD has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.72 to 0.74 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

SLDR vs. CGSD — Risk / Return Rank

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

SLDR

SLDR Risk / Return Rank: 81
SLDR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 78
SLDR Sortino Ratio Rank: 88
SLDR Omega Ratio Rank: 92
SLDR Calmar Ratio Rank: 73
SLDR Martin Ratio Rank: 74

CGSD

CGSD Risk / Return Rank: 87
CGSD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 87
CGSD Sortino Ratio Rank: 93
CGSD Omega Ratio Rank: 91
CGSD Calmar Ratio Rank: 77
CGSD Martin Ratio Rank: 86

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.

SLDR vs. CGSD - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Global X Short-Term Treasury Ladder ETF (SLDR) and Capital Group Short Duration Income ETF (CGSD). 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.

	SLDR	CGSD	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.51	2.94	-0.43
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	4.03	4.65	-0.62
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.62	1.61	+0.01
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.61	3.88	-0.27
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	13.93	18.36	-4.43
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

SLDR vs. CGSD - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current SLDR Sharpe Ratio is 2.51, which is comparable to the CGSD Sharpe Ratio of 2.94. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of SLDR and CGSD, 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

	SLDR	CGSD	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.51	2.94	-0.43
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	2.58	2.41	+0.17

Drawdowns

SLDR vs. CGSD - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum SLDR drawdown since its inception was -0.87%, smaller than the maximum CGSD drawdown of -1.75%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for SLDR and CGSD.

Drawdown Indicators

	SLDR	CGSD	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-0.87%	-1.75%	+0.88%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-0.87%	-1.11%	+0.24%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-1.11%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.28%	-0.14%	-0.14%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.14%	-0.28%	+0.14%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.23%	0.23%	0.00%

Volatility

SLDR vs. CGSD - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Global X Short-Term Treasury Ladder ETF (SLDR) is 0.37%, while Capital Group Short Duration Income ETF (CGSD) has a volatility of 0.39%. This indicates that SLDR experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CGSD based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	SLDR	CGSD	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.37%	0.39%	-0.02%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	0.78%	1.01%	-0.23%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.25%	1.47%	-0.22%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	1.24%	2.16%	-0.92%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	1.24%	2.16%	-0.92%

SLDR vs. CGSD - Expense Ratio Comparison

SLDR has a 0.12% expense ratio, which is lower than CGSD's 0.25% expense ratio. Despite the difference, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.

Dividends

SLDR vs. CGSD - Dividend Comparison

SLDR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.72%, less than CGSD's 4.46% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022
CGSD Capital Group Short Duration Income ETF	4.46%	4.48%	4.57%	4.43%	0.64%
SLDR Global X Short-Term Treasury Ladder ETF	3.72%	3.80%	0.98%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both SLDR and CGSD in my portfolio?

SLDR and CGSD have a correlation of 0.74, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, SLDR or CGSD?

CGSD has higher volatility (0.39%) compared to SLDR (0.37%). In terms of maximum drawdown, SLDR dropped -0.87% vs CGSD's -1.75%.

Which ETF is better, SLDR or CGSD?

On 1-year performance, CGSD leads with 4.30% vs 3.14% for SLDR. On fees, SLDR is cheaper at 0.12% per year. Their volatility is very similar. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, SLDR or CGSD?

Over the 1-year period, CGSD has performed better with a 4.30% return vs 3.14%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, SLDR or CGSD?

SLDR is cheaper with a 0.12% expense ratio, compared with 0.25% for CGSD.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, SLDR or CGSD?

CGSD has the higher dividend yield at 4.46%, compared with 3.72% for SLDR.

What is the main difference between SLDR and CGSD?

SLDR is categorized as Government Bonds, while CGSD is Short-Term Bond. They also come from different issuers: Global X and Capital Group. Their fees differ too: 0.12% for SLDR and 0.25% for CGSD.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

CGSD currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.94 vs 2.51), 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.