CGMS vs IVV
CGMS vs IVV
Capital Group US Multi Sector Income ETF vs iShares Core S&P 500 ETF
Quick Verdict
IVV has a lower expense ratio. IVV delivered stronger 1-year returns. CGMS offers more diversification with 831 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | CGMS | IVV | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.39% | 0.03% | |
| AUM | $5.3B | $865.2B | |
| Dividend Yield | 6.12% | 1.09% | |
| Holdings | 1,447 | 508 | |
| YTD Return | +1.74% | +13.52% | |
| 1Y Return | +4.48% | +23.63% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +7.70% | +21.26% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | - | +13.52% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 5.1% | 15.1% | |
| Max Drawdown | -4.1% | -56.5% | |
| Fund Family | Capital Group (US) | iShares by BlackRock (US) | |
| Category | Fixed Income | Equity | |
| Inception | Oct 25, 2022 | May 15, 2000 |
CGMS vs IVV Performance
Capital Group US Multi Sector Income ETF (CGMS) is a ETF from Capital Group (US) and iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is a ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US). Over the past year CGMS returned +4.48% while IVV returned +23.63%. Year to date, CGMS is up 1.74% versus a gain of 13.52% for IVV.
Over three years, CGMS compounded at +7.70% per year against +21.26% for IVV. Across the full 4-year window we track, CGMS has the edge at +8.13% annualized vs +7.04%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
IVV has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 15.1% compared with 5.1% for CGMS. 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 -4.1% for CGMS and -56.5% for IVV. 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 0.75. They usually move together, but the gap leaves some room for diversification.
Fees and Cost Over Time
CGMS charges 0.39% per year while IVV charges 0.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $39 vs $3 annually, a gap of $36 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, CGMS currently yields 6.12% against 1.09% for IVV.
Holdings Overlap
CGMS and IVV share 0 holdings out of 1336 unique holdings combined, representing a 0.0% weight overlap.
Moderate overlap means holding both could provide meaningful diversification benefits.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, CGMS or IVV?
CGMS has an expense ratio of 0.39% while IVV charges 0.03%. IVV is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $36 per year of difference.
Which performed better, CGMS or IVV?
Over the past year CGMS returned +4.48% vs +23.63% for IVV, so IVV leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (4 years), CGMS annualized +8.13% vs +7.04% for IVV. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, CGMS or IVV?
IVV has been the more volatile fund at 15.1% annualized versus 5.1% for CGMS. Worst drawdown: CGMS -4.1% vs IVV -56.5%.
Should I hold both CGMS and IVV?
CGMS and IVV have a monthly-return correlation of 0.75, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between CGMS and IVV?
CGMS and IVV share 0 common holdings with a 0.0% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 1336 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, CGMS or IVV?
CGMS yields 6.12% while IVV yields 1.09%, so CGMS currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Popular ETF Comparisons
Get Full ETF Analytics
Access complete holdings data, overlap analysis, screener tools, and more with FundXLS.