WRND vs. CGDG

Last updated Aug 4, 2026

WRND (IQ Global Equity R&D Leaders ETF) and CGDG (Capital Group Dividend Growers ETF) are both Global Equities funds. WRND is passively managed, while CGDG is actively managed. Over the past year, WRND returned 30.58% vs 18.65% for CGDG. Their 0.75 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. WRND charges 0.18%/yr vs 0.47%/yr for CGDG.

Performance

WRND vs. CGDG - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in IQ Global Equity R&D Leaders ETF (WRND) and Capital Group Dividend Growers ETF (CGDG). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, WRND achieves a 14.09% return, which is significantly higher than CGDG's 9.03% return.

WRND

• 1D: 1.37%
• 1M: 1.06%
• 6M: 8.55%
• YTD: 14.09%
• 1Y: 30.58%
• 3Y*: 20.48%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 14.04%

CGDG

• 1D: -0.08%
• 1M: 1.14%
• 6M: 5.85%
• YTD: 9.03%
• 1Y: 18.65%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 19.08%

*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)
CGDG Capital Group Dividend Growers ETF	$21.42M	$21.23M	$23.23M
WRND IQ Global Equity R&D Leaders ETF	$58.56K	$31.47K	$22.07K

WRND vs. CGDG - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
WRND IQ Global Equity R&D Leaders ETF	14.09%	27.72%	13.46%	10.91%
CGDG Capital Group Dividend Growers ETF	9.03%	22.74%	11.52%	10.17%

Correlation

The correlation between WRND and CGDG is 0.66, which is moderate. They have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently, sharing some price drivers without tracking each other closely.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.66
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 28, 2023	0.75

The correlation between WRND and CGDG has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.66 to 0.75 - a consistent structural relationship.

WRND vs. CGDG - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	WRND	CGDG
Technology	51.9%	15.5%
Industrials	12.8%	10.6%
Healthcare	11.9%	10.7%
Communication Services	10.8%	2.3%
Consumer Cyclical	7.0%	7.6%
Financial Services	2.9%	20.3%
Consumer Defensive	1.5%	10.4%
Basic Materials	1.3%	4.9%
Energy	-	6.4%
Real Estate	-	3.6%
Utilities	-	8.0%

Return for Risk

WRND vs. CGDG — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

WRND

WRND Risk / Return Rank: 65
WRND Sharpe Ratio Rank: 65
WRND Sortino Ratio Rank: 63
WRND Omega Ratio Rank: 60
WRND Calmar Ratio Rank: 66
WRND Martin Ratio Rank: 69

CGDG

CGDG Risk / Return Rank: 73
CGDG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 74
CGDG Sortino Ratio Rank: 75
CGDG Omega Ratio Rank: 73
CGDG Calmar Ratio Rank: 68
CGDG Martin Ratio Rank: 75

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

WRND vs. CGDG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for IQ Global Equity R&D Leaders ETF (WRND) and Capital Group Dividend Growers ETF (CGDG). 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.

	WRND	CGDG	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.63	1.74	-0.11
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.24	2.47	-0.23
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.28	1.31	-0.03
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.47	2.43	+0.04
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	9.08	9.55	-0.47

WRND vs. CGDG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current WRND Sharpe Ratio is 1.63, which is comparable to the CGDG Sharpe Ratio of 1.74. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of WRND and CGDG, 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

WRND vs. CGDG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum WRND drawdown since its inception was -27.16%, which is greater than CGDG's maximum drawdown of -10.52%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for WRND and CGDG.

Drawdown Indicators

	WRND	CGDG	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-27.16%	-10.52%	-16.64%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-12.43%	-7.72%	-4.71%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-18.41%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.51%	-0.39%	-2.12%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-5.90%	-1.28%	-4.62%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.38%	1.96%	+1.42%

Volatility

WRND vs. CGDG - Volatility Comparison

IQ Global Equity R&D Leaders ETF (WRND) has a higher volatility of 6.42% compared to Capital Group Dividend Growers ETF (CGDG) at 2.32%. This indicates that WRND's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CGDG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	WRND	CGDG	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.42%	2.32%	+4.10%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	15.91%	8.47%	+7.44%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	18.93%	10.80%	+8.13%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	19.02%	12.04%	+6.98%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	19.02%	12.04%	+6.98%

WRND vs. CGDG - Expense Ratio Comparison

WRND has a 0.18% expense ratio, which is lower than CGDG's 0.47% expense ratio.

Dividends

WRND vs. CGDG - Dividend Comparison

WRND's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.92%, less than CGDG's 2.24% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022
CGDG Capital Group Dividend Growers ETF	2.24%	1.95%	2.15%	0.39%	0.00%
WRND IQ Global Equity R&D Leaders ETF	0.92%	1.29%	1.15%	2.06%	2.06%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both WRND and CGDG in my portfolio?

WRND and CGDG have a correlation of 0.66, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, WRND or CGDG?

WRND has higher volatility (6.42%) compared to CGDG (2.32%). In terms of maximum drawdown, WRND dropped -27.16% vs CGDG's -10.52%.

Which ETF is better, WRND or CGDG?

On 1-year performance, WRND leads with 30.58% vs 18.65% for CGDG. On fees, WRND is cheaper at 0.18% per year. On volatility, CGDG has been the lower-risk option at 2.32%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, WRND or CGDG?

Over the 1-year period, WRND has performed better with a 30.58% return vs 18.65%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, WRND or CGDG?

WRND is cheaper with a 0.18% expense ratio, compared with 0.47% for CGDG.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, WRND or CGDG?

CGDG has the higher dividend yield at 2.24%, compared with 0.92% for WRND.

What is the main difference between WRND and CGDG?

They also come from different issuers: IndexIQ and Capital Group. Their fees differ too: 0.18% for WRND and 0.47% for CGDG.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

CGDG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.74 vs 1.63), 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.