Screener
BFOR vs CGCB
Barron's 400 ETF vs Capital Group Core Bond ETF
Key differences
- CGCB costs 0.38% less per year.
- CGCB is significantly larger than BFOR — larger funds tend to be more liquid and less likely to close.
- BFOR is classified as equity, while CGCB is fixed income — different risk/return profiles.
- BFOR follows a index tracking strategy; CGCB uses active selection.
- BFOR has a longer track record, which may reduce uncertainty around long-term behavior.
Side-by-side comparison
| BFOR | CGCB | |
|---|---|---|
| Annual cost (TER) | 0.65% | 0.27% |
| Fund size (AUM) | $211M | $4.8B |
| Since | 2013 | 2023 |
| Dividend yield | 0.55% | 4.23% |
| Asset class | equity | fixed income |
| Region | north america | north america |
| Strategy | index tracking | active selection |
| CAGR 1Y | +22.3% | +5.6% |
| CAGR 3Y | +20.1% | N/A |
| CAGR 5Y | +10.0% | N/A |
| Sharpe 3Y | 0.94 | N/A |
| Volatility 1Y | 14.92% | 3.99% |
| Max drawdown | -41.27% | -5.16% |
Green dot indicates the better value for that metric. Performance data is historical and does not predict future results.
Similar to BFOR and CGCB
Explore further