Screener
CSM vs CGBL
ProShares Large Cap Core Plus vs Capital Group Core Balanced ETF
Key differences
- CGBL costs 0.12% less per year.
- CGBL is significantly larger than CSM — larger funds tend to be more liquid and less likely to close.
- CSM is classified as alternative, while CGBL is mixed asset — different risk/return profiles.
- CSM follows a long short strategy; CGBL uses active selection.
- CSM has a longer track record, which may reduce uncertainty around long-term behavior.
Side-by-side comparison
| CSM | CGBL | |
|---|---|---|
| Annual cost (TER) | 0.45% | 0.33% |
| Fund size (AUM) | $499M | $6.1B |
| Since | 2009 | 2023 |
| Dividend yield | 1.05% | 1.92% |
| Asset class | alternative | mixed asset |
| Region | north america | — |
| Strategy | long short | active selection |
| CAGR 1Y | +29.2% | +19.6% |
| CAGR 3Y | +23.1% | N/A |
| CAGR 5Y | +13.4% | N/A |
| Sharpe 3Y | 1.20 | N/A |
| Volatility 1Y | 12.11% | 9.65% |
| Max drawdown | -36.11% | -11.66% |
Green dot indicates the better value for that metric. Performance data is historical and does not predict future results.
Similar to CSM and CGBL
Explore further