ACVF vs CGUS
American Conservative Values ETF vs Capital Group Core Equity ETF
Which is better, ACVF or CGUS?
Nearly the same fund. CGUS costs less.
CGUS has a lower expense ratio. CGUS led over 1Y, 3Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.96. ACVF is less concentrated, with 28.8% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 43.8%.
MarketXLS is not an investment adviser. This comparison is generated automatically from market data and is for information only. A Best mark means the better reading on that one measure, not a recommendation to buy.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | ACVF | CGUS |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.75% | 0.33%Best |
| AUM | $155M | $12.3B |
| Dividend Yield | 0.49% | 0.83% |
| Holdings | 778 | 75 |
| YTD Return | +11.40% | +11.95%Best |
| 1Y Return | +12.34% | +15.39%Best |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +18.66% | +21.76%Best |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +11.53% | - |
| Volatility (annualized) | 14.9% | 14.7%Best |
| Max Drawdown | -21.6%Best | -21.9% |
| $10,000 over 4.6 years | $17,660 | $19,073Best |
| Top 10 Weight | 28.8%Best | 43.8% |
| Fund Family | ACV ETFs | Capital Group (US) |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Blend | Large Cap Blend |
| Inception | Oct 28, 2020 | Feb 22, 2022 |
Volatility and max drawdown, and the $10,000 over 4.6 years row, are measured over the window both funds cover: Feb 24, 2022 to Oct 14, 2026 (4.6 years).
ACVF vs CGUS growth
Month-end closes. Both lines start at 0% in the first month shown, so the gap between them is the difference in growth across that window. The full view covers the 4.6 years both funds cover.
ACVF vs CGUS Performance
American Conservative Values ETF (ACVF) is an ETF from ACV ETFs and Capital Group Core Equity ETF (CGUS) is an ETF from Capital Group (US). Over the past year ACVF returned +12.34% while CGUS returned +15.39%. Year to date, ACVF is up 11.40% versus a gain of 11.95% for CGUS.
Over three years, ACVF compounded at +18.66% per year against +21.76% for CGUS.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
ACVF has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 14.9% compared with 14.7% for CGUS. 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 -21.6% for ACVF and -21.9% for CGUS. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.96. They move almost in lockstep, so holding both mostly duplicates the same exposure.
Fees and Cost Over Time
ACVF charges 0.75% per year while CGUS charges 0.33%. On a $10,000 position that is $75 vs $33 annually, a gap of $42 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, ACVF currently yields 0.49% against 0.83% for CGUS.
Holdings Overlap
38.6% of ACVF's money is in holdings CGUS also owns. 59.3% of CGUS's money is in holdings ACVF also owns.
The two portfolios partly overlap.
40 positions in common, counted across the 387 positions we hold weights for in ACVF and 68 in CGUS, against full books of 778 and 75.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 19 positions for CGUS that do not appear in our book for ACVF (30.1% of the fund), and 333 for ACVF that do not appear in CGUS (60.6%).
Some of those will be the same company recorded under a different code in one of the two books, so the real difference in what you would own is no larger than this and may be smaller. We do not name the individual positions here for that reason.
Top Shared Holdings
| Stock | Weight in ACVF | Weight in CGUS | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| NVDANvidia Corp | 8.46% | 7.90% | 0.56% |
| MSFTMicrosoft Corp | 5.34% | 7.05% | 1.71% |
| AVGOBroadcom Inc | 2.52% | 5.26% | 2.74% |
| LLYEli Lilly & Co. | 1.63% | 3.68% | 2.05% |
| CSCOCisco Systems Inc. - Ordinary Shares | 2.72% | 1.87% | 0.85% |
| AMATApplied Materials, Inc. | 1.10% | 2.08% | 0.98% |
| MAMastercard Inc | 1.53% | 1.62% | 0.09% |
| ANETArista Networks Inc Common Stock | 1.38% | 1.47% | 0.09% |
| RTXRaytheon Co. | 0.60% | 1.84% | 1.24% |
| MUMicron Technology, Inc. | 1.69% | 0.38% | 1.31% |
59.3% of CGUS is already inside ACVF.
You probably hold more than these two. Add the rest and see how much of the whole book is the same companies twice.
Free for up to 10 holdings. No account needed.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, ACVF or CGUS?
ACVF has an expense ratio of 0.75% while CGUS charges 0.33%. CGUS is the cheaper option, by $42 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, ACVF or CGUS?
Over the past year ACVF returned +12.34% vs +15.39% for CGUS, so CGUS leads on 1-year performance. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, ACVF or CGUS?
ACVF has been the more volatile fund at 14.9% annualized versus 14.7% for CGUS. Worst drawdown: ACVF -21.6% vs CGUS -21.9%.
Should I hold both ACVF and CGUS?
ACVF and CGUS have a monthly-return correlation of 0.96, so they move almost identically. What is left to separate them is the fee and the index each one tracks. This is information, not a recommendation.
What is the holdings overlap between ACVF and CGUS?
59.3% of CGUS's money is in holdings ACVF also owns. 59.3% of CGUS's is in holdings ACVF also owns. They hold 40 positions in common, counted across the 387 positions we hold weights for in ACVF and 68 in CGUS.
Which pays a higher dividend, ACVF or CGUS?
ACVF yields 0.49% while CGUS yields 0.83%, so CGUS currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is CGUS better than ACVF?
CGUS has a lower expense ratio. CGUS led over 1Y, 3Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.96. ACVF is less concentrated, with 28.8% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 43.8%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.