CGDV vs ZAP
Capital Group Dividend Value ETF vs Global X US Electrification ETF
Which is better, CGDV or ZAP?
CGDV has been ahead.
CGDV has a lower expense ratio. CGDV led over 1Y and the full window. CGDV is less concentrated, with 43.1% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 44.2%.
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 | CGDV | ZAP |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.33%Best | 0.50% |
| AUM | $39.3B | $440M |
| Dividend Yield | 1.23% | 1.74% |
| Holdings | 116 | 94 |
| YTD Return | +12.74%Best | +6.45% |
| 1Y Return | +19.20%Best | +2.72% |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +24.22% | - |
| Volatility (annualized) | 11.8%Best | 15.2% |
| Max Drawdown | -14.3% | -13.0%Best |
| $10,000 over 1.8 years | $14,308Best | $13,487 |
| Top 10 Weight | 43.1%Best | 44.2% |
| Fund Family | Capital Group (US) | Global X by mirae Asset |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Value | Large Cap Value |
| Inception | Feb 22, 2022 | Dec 17, 2024 |
Not shown on this pair: 5Y Return (annualized).
Volatility and max drawdown, and the $10,000 over 1.8 years row, are measured over the window both funds cover: Dec 18, 2024 to Oct 14, 2026 (1.8 years).
CGDV vs ZAP 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 1.8 years both funds cover.
CGDV vs ZAP Performance
Capital Group Dividend Value ETF (CGDV) is an ETF from Capital Group (US) and Global X US Electrification ETF (ZAP) is an ETF from Global X by mirae Asset. Over the past year CGDV returned +19.20% while ZAP returned +2.72%. Year to date, CGDV is up 12.74% versus a gain of 6.45% for ZAP.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
ZAP has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 15.2% compared with 11.8% for CGDV. 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 -14.3% for CGDV and -13.0% for ZAP. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.53. They move together some of the time, and apart the rest.
Fees and Cost Over Time
CGDV charges 0.33% per year while ZAP charges 0.50%. On a $10,000 position that is $33 vs $50 annually, a gap of $17 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, CGDV currently yields 1.23% against 1.74% for ZAP.
Holdings Overlap
0.9% of CGDV's money is in holdings ZAP also owns. 3.6% of ZAP's money is in holdings CGDV also owns.
ZAP and CGDV share little of their money.
1 positions in common, counted across the 53 positions we hold weights for in CGDV and 45 in ZAP, against full books of 116 and 94.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 43 positions for ZAP that do not appear in our book for CGDV (95.1% of the fund), and 47 for CGDV that do not appear in ZAP (90.7%).
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 CGDV | Weight in ZAP | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| NEENextera Energy Inc | 0.89% | 3.65% | 2.76% |
You are not choosing between two funds in isolation.
Whichever of CGDV and ZAP you pick has to sit alongside everything else you own. Add the rest and see what the combination actually holds.
Free for up to 10 holdings. No account needed.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, CGDV or ZAP?
CGDV has an expense ratio of 0.33% while ZAP charges 0.50%. CGDV is the cheaper option, by $17 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, CGDV or ZAP?
Over the past year CGDV returned +19.20% vs +2.72% for ZAP, so CGDV leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (2 years), CGDV annualized +22.02% vs +18.08% for ZAP. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, CGDV or ZAP?
ZAP has been the more volatile fund at 15.2% annualized versus 11.8% for CGDV. Worst drawdown: CGDV -14.3% vs ZAP -13.0%.
Should I hold both CGDV and ZAP?
CGDV and ZAP have a monthly-return correlation of 0.53, so their returns are far enough apart for the mix to behave differently from either one alone. This is information, not a recommendation.
What is the holdings overlap between CGDV and ZAP?
3.6% of ZAP's money is in holdings CGDV also owns. 3.6% of ZAP's is in holdings CGDV also owns. They hold 1 positions in common, counted across the 53 positions we hold weights for in CGDV and 45 in ZAP.
Which pays a higher dividend, CGDV or ZAP?
CGDV yields 1.23% while ZAP yields 1.74%, so ZAP currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is ZAP better than CGDV?
CGDV has a lower expense ratio. CGDV led over 1Y and the full window. CGDV is less concentrated, with 43.1% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 44.2%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.