CGUS vs HIDV
Capital Group Core Equity ETF vs AB US High Dividend ETF
Which is better, CGUS or HIDV?
Each has led over a different period.
CGUS has a lower expense ratio. CGUS led over 3Y and the full window, HIDV over 1Y. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.94. HIDV is less concentrated, with 36.8% 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 | CGUS | HIDV |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.33%Best | 0.35% |
| AUM | $12.3B | $205M |
| Dividend Yield | 0.83% | 2.56% |
| Holdings | 75 | 108 |
| YTD Return | +11.95%Best | +11.94% |
| 1Y Return | +15.39% | +17.30%Best |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +21.76%Best | +21.14% |
| Volatility (annualized) | 11.9%Best | 12.5% |
| Max Drawdown | -18.1%Best | -18.8% |
| $10,000 over 3.6 years | $20,593Best | $19,993 |
| Top 10 Weight | 43.8% | 36.8%Best |
| Fund Family | Capital Group (US) | AllianceBernstein L.P. |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Blend | Large Cap Blend |
| Inception | Feb 22, 2022 | Mar 22, 2023 |
Not shown on this pair: 5Y Return (annualized).
Volatility and max drawdown, and the $10,000 over 3.6 years row, are measured over the window both funds cover: Mar 22, 2023 to Oct 14, 2026 (3.6 years).
CGUS vs HIDV 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 3.6 years both funds cover.
CGUS vs HIDV Performance
Capital Group Core Equity ETF (CGUS) is an ETF from Capital Group (US) and AB US High Dividend ETF (HIDV) is an ETF from AllianceBernstein L.P.. Over the past year CGUS returned +15.39% while HIDV returned +17.30%. Year to date, CGUS is up 11.95% versus a gain of 11.94% for HIDV.
Over three years, CGUS compounded at +21.76% per year against +21.14% for HIDV. Across the full 4-year window we track, CGUS has the edge at +22.22% annualized vs +21.22%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
HIDV has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 12.5% compared with 11.9% 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 -18.1% for CGUS and -18.8% for HIDV. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
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
CGUS charges 0.33% per year while HIDV charges 0.35%. On a $10,000 position that is $33 vs $35 annually, a gap of $2 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, CGUS currently yields 0.83% against 2.56% for HIDV.
Holdings Overlap
55.4% of CGUS's money is in holdings HIDV also owns. 45.2% of HIDV's money is in holdings CGUS also owns.
The two portfolios partly overlap.
22 positions in common, counted across the 68 positions we hold weights for in CGUS and 107 in HIDV, against full books of 75 and 108.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 80 positions for HIDV that do not appear in our book for CGUS (52.8% of the fund), and 37 for CGUS that do not appear in HIDV (34.0%).
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 CGUS | Weight in HIDV | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| NVDANvidia Corp | 7.90% | 9.45% | 1.55% |
| MSFTMicrosoft Corp | 7.05% | 5.27% | 1.78% |
| AAPLApple, Inc | 2.53% | 7.03% | 4.50% |
| AMZNAmazon.Com Inc | 4.75% | 2.92% | 1.83% |
| AVGOBroadcom Inc | 5.26% | 1.77% | 3.49% |
| GOOGLAlphabet Inc | 3.14% | 3.00% | 0.14% |
| METAMeta Platforms Inc | 4.55% | 1.57% | 2.98% |
| LLYEli Lilly & Co. | 3.68% | 0.56% | 3.12% |
| GOOGAlphabet Inc. C | 1.89% | 1.62% | 0.27% |
| CSCOCisco Systems Inc. - Ordinary Shares | 1.87% | 1.52% | 0.35% |
55.4% of CGUS is already inside HIDV.
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, CGUS or HIDV?
CGUS has an expense ratio of 0.33% while HIDV charges 0.35%. CGUS is the cheaper option, by $2 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, CGUS or HIDV?
Over the past year CGUS returned +15.39% vs +17.30% for HIDV, so HIDV leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (4 years), CGUS annualized +22.22% vs +21.22% for HIDV. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, CGUS or HIDV?
HIDV has been the more volatile fund at 12.5% annualized versus 11.9% for CGUS. Worst drawdown: CGUS -18.1% vs HIDV -18.8%.
Should I hold both CGUS and HIDV?
CGUS and HIDV have a monthly-return correlation of 0.94, 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 CGUS and HIDV?
55.4% of CGUS's money is in holdings HIDV also owns. 45.2% of HIDV's is in holdings CGUS also owns. They hold 22 positions in common, counted across the 68 positions we hold weights for in CGUS and 107 in HIDV.
Which pays a higher dividend, CGUS or HIDV?
CGUS yields 0.83% while HIDV yields 2.56%, so HIDV currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is HIDV better than CGUS?
CGUS has a lower expense ratio. CGUS led over 3Y and the full window, HIDV over 1Y. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.94. HIDV is less concentrated, with 36.8% 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.