Screener
CGBL vs EPSV
Capital Group Core Balanced ETF vs Harbor SMID Cap Value ETF
Key differences
- CGBL costs 0.55% less per year.
- CGBL is significantly larger than EPSV — larger funds tend to be more liquid and less likely to close.
- CGBL is classified as mixed asset, while EPSV is equity — different risk/return profiles.
- CGBL follows a active selection strategy; EPSV uses index tracking.
Side-by-side comparison
| CGBL | EPSV | |
|---|---|---|
| Annual cost (TER) | 0.33% | 0.88% |
| Fund size (AUM) | $6.1B | $5M |
| Since | 2023 | 2025 |
| Dividend yield | 1.92% | — |
| Asset class | mixed asset | equity |
| Region | — | north america |
| Strategy | active selection | index tracking |
| CAGR 1Y | +19.6% | +43.7% |
| CAGR 3Y | N/A | N/A |
| CAGR 5Y | N/A | N/A |
| Sharpe 3Y | N/A | N/A |
| Volatility 1Y | 9.65% | 17.79% |
| Max drawdown | -11.66% | -8.93% |
Green dot indicates the better value for that metric. Performance data is historical and does not predict future results.
Similar to CGBL and EPSV
Explore further