Screener
BFOR vs CGIC
Barron's 400 ETF vs Capital Group International Core Equity ETF
Key differences
- CGIC costs 0.11% less per year.
- CGIC is significantly larger than BFOR — larger funds tend to be more liquid and less likely to close.
- BFOR follows a index tracking strategy; CGIC uses active selection.
- BFOR has a longer track record, which may reduce uncertainty around long-term behavior.
Side-by-side comparison
| BFOR | CGIC | |
|---|---|---|
| Annual cost (TER) | 0.65% | 0.54% |
| Fund size (AUM) | $211M | $1.7B |
| Since | 2013 | 2024 |
| Dividend yield | 0.55% | 1.38% |
| Asset class | equity | equity |
| Region | north america | — |
| Strategy | index tracking | active selection |
| CAGR 1Y | +22.3% | +30.4% |
| CAGR 3Y | +20.1% | N/A |
| CAGR 5Y | +10.0% | N/A |
| Sharpe 3Y | 0.94 | N/A |
| Volatility 1Y | 14.92% | 14.96% |
| Max drawdown | -41.27% | -13.10% |
Green dot indicates the better value for that metric. Performance data is historical and does not predict future results.
Similar to BFOR and CGIC
Explore further