CGBL vs VTI

Quick Verdict

VTI has a lower expense ratio. VTI delivered stronger 1-year returns. VTI offers more diversification with 2783 holdings.

Lower Fees: VTIHigher Returns: VTIMore Diversified: VTI

Side-by-Side Comparison

MetricCGBLVTIWinner
Expense Ratio0.33%0.03%
AUM$7.2B$663.5B
Dividend Yield1.85%1.07%
Holdings773,543
YTD Return+8.38%+13.57%
1Y Return+16.12%+24.23%
3Y Return (annualized)-+20.73%
5Y Return (annualized)-+12.24%
Volatility (annualized)9.2%15.3%
Max Drawdown-11.7%-56.6%
Fund FamilyCapital Group (US)Vanguard (US)
CategoryAllocation/BalancedEquity
InceptionSep 26, 2023May 24, 2001

CGBL vs VTI Performance

Capital Group Core Balanced ETF (CGBL) is a ETF from Capital Group (US) and Vanguard Total Stock Market ETF (VTI) is a ETF from Vanguard (US). Over the past year CGBL returned +16.12% while VTI returned +24.23%. Year to date, CGBL is up 8.38% versus a gain of 13.57% for VTI.

Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns

VTI has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 15.3% compared with 9.2% for CGBL. Lower volatility generally means a smoother ride, though it often comes with lower long-run returns.

The deepest peak-to-trough decline in our data was -11.7% for CGBL and -56.6% for VTI. Drawdown depth is worth weighing if you expect to sell during market stress rather than ride it out.

The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.94. They move almost in lockstep, so holding both mostly duplicates the same exposure.

Fees and Cost Over Time

CGBL charges 0.33% per year while VTI charges 0.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $33 vs $3 annually, a gap of $30 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, CGBL currently yields 1.85% against 1.07% for VTI.

Holdings Overlap

25.9%overlap

CGBL and VTI share 63 holdings out of 2798 unique holdings combined, representing a 25.9% weight overlap.

Moderate overlap means holding both could provide meaningful diversification benefits.

Top Shared Holdings

StockWeight in CGBLWeight in VTIDifference
AAPL2.33%5.84%3.51%
NVDA0.93%6.32%5.39%
AVGO4.68%2.46%2.22%
MSFTProProPro
GOOGProProPro
AMZNProProPro
MUProProPro
METAProProPro
PMProProPro
LLYProProPro
See all 10 holdings CGBL shares with VTI
Exact weights in each fund and the difference, for every overlapping position.
Get FundXLS Pro: $29/moFirst 500 subscribers, then $49/mo. Cancel anytime.

Frequently Asked Questions

Which is cheaper, CGBL or VTI?

CGBL has an expense ratio of 0.33% while VTI charges 0.03%. VTI is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $30 per year of difference.

Which performed better, CGBL or VTI?

Over the past year CGBL returned +16.12% vs +24.23% for VTI, so VTI leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (3 years), CGBL annualized +18.19% vs +8.12% for VTI. Past performance does not guarantee future results.

Which is riskier, CGBL or VTI?

VTI has been the more volatile fund at 15.3% annualized versus 9.2% for CGBL. Worst drawdown: CGBL -11.7% vs VTI -56.6%.

Should I hold both CGBL and VTI?

CGBL and VTI have a monthly-return correlation of 0.94, so they move almost identically. Holding both adds little diversification - most investors pick one, usually on fees or the specific index tracked.

What is the holdings overlap between CGBL and VTI?

CGBL and VTI share 63 common holdings with a 25.9% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 2798 unique securities.

Which pays a higher dividend, CGBL or VTI?

CGBL yields 1.85% while VTI yields 1.07%, so CGBL currently pays the higher dividend yield.

Get Full ETF Analytics

Access complete holdings data, overlap analysis, screener tools, and more with FundXLS.

See inside every ETF you own
$29/moCancel anytime.
Try FundXLS →