XAGG vs. CGMS
XAGG (Eaton Vance Income Opportunities ETF) and CGMS (Capital Group U.S. Multi-Sector Income ETF) are both Multisector Bonds funds. Both are actively managed. A 0.69 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. XAGG charges 0.50%/yr vs 0.39%/yr for CGMS.
Performance
XAGG vs. CGMS - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, XAGG achieves a 1.93% return, which is significantly higher than CGMS's 1.54% return.
XAGG
- 1D
- -0.15%
- 1M
- 0.41%
- YTD
- 1.93%
- 6M
- 2.07%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
CGMS
- 1D
- -0.25%
- 1M
- 0.56%
- YTD
- 1.54%
- 6M
- 1.68%
- 1Y
- 7.10%
- 3Y*
- 7.92%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
XAGG vs. CGMS - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
XAGG Eaton Vance Income Opportunities ETF | 1.93% | 1.61% |
CGMS Capital Group U.S. Multi-Sector Income ETF | 1.54% | 0.99% |
Correlation
The correlation between XAGG and CGMS is 0.69, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 11, 2025 | 0.69 |
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
Return for Risk
XAGG vs. CGMS — Risk / Return Rank
XAGG
CGMS
XAGG vs. CGMS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Eaton Vance Income Opportunities ETF (XAGG) and Capital Group U.S. Multi-Sector Income ETF (CGMS). 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.
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| XAGG | CGMS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | — | 2.08 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 1.88 | 1.66 | +0.22 |
Drawdowns
XAGG vs. CGMS - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum XAGG drawdown since its inception was -2.88%, smaller than the maximum CGMS drawdown of -4.08%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XAGG and CGMS.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| XAGG | CGMS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -2.88% | -4.08% | +1.20% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | — | -2.47% | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -4.08% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.49% | -0.25% | -0.24% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -0.57% | -0.67% | +0.10% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | — | 0.55% | — |
Volatility
XAGG vs. CGMS - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| XAGG | CGMS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | — | 1.15% | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | — | 2.66% | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 3.48% | 3.43% | +0.05% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 3.48% | 5.13% | -1.65% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 3.48% | 5.13% | -1.65% |
XAGG vs. CGMS - Expense Ratio Comparison
XAGG has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is higher than CGMS's 0.39% expense ratio.
Dividends
XAGG vs. CGMS - Dividend Comparison
XAGG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.86%, less than CGMS's 6.09% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CGMS Capital Group U.S. Multi-Sector Income ETF | 6.09% | 6.00% | 5.91% | 5.84% | 0.97% |
XAGG Eaton Vance Income Opportunities ETF | 3.86% | 1.02% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
XAGG and CGMS have a correlation of 0.69, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, CGMS is cheaper at 0.39% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
CGMS is cheaper with a 0.39% expense ratio, compared with 0.50% for XAGG.
CGMS has the higher dividend yield at 6.09%, compared with 3.86% for XAGG.
They also come from different issuers: Eaton Vance and Capital Group. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for XAGG and 0.39% for CGMS.
Find the right allocation for XAGG and CGMS
Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.
Open Portfolio Optimizer