CVMC vs LOWV
Calvert US Mid-Cap Core Responsible Index ETF vs AB US Low Volatility Equity ETF
Which is better, CVMC or LOWV?
Each has led over a different period.
CVMC has a lower expense ratio. CVMC led over 1Y and 3Y, LOWV over the full window. CVMC is less concentrated, with 5.9% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 42.0%.
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 | CVMC | LOWV |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.15%Best | 0.39% |
| AUM | $115M | $206M |
| Dividend Yield | 1.23% | 0.87% |
| Holdings | 1,184 | 71 |
| YTD Return | +14.85%Best | +8.98% |
| 1Y Return | +18.30%Best | +9.29% |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +17.39%Best | +16.12% |
| Volatility (annualized) | 15.6% | 9.7%Best |
| Max Drawdown | -22.5% | -13.9%Best |
| $10,000 over 3.6 years | $16,565 | $17,794Best |
| Top 10 Weight | 5.9%Best | 42.0% |
| Fund Family | Calvert | AllianceBernstein L.P. |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Mid Cap Blend | Mid Cap Blend |
| Inception | Jan 30, 2023 | 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).
CVMC vs LOWV 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.
CVMC vs LOWV Performance
Calvert US Mid-Cap Core Responsible Index ETF (CVMC) is an ETF from Calvert and AB US Low Volatility Equity ETF (LOWV) is an ETF from AllianceBernstein L.P.. Over the past year CVMC returned +18.30% while LOWV returned +9.29%. Year to date, CVMC is up 14.85% versus a gain of 8.98% for LOWV.
Over three years, CVMC compounded at +17.39% per year against +16.12% for LOWV. Across the full 4-year window we track, LOWV has the edge at +17.36% annualized vs +15.05%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
CVMC has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 15.6% compared with 9.7% for LOWV. 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 -22.5% for CVMC and -13.9% for LOWV. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.76. They usually move together, but the gap leaves some room for diversification.
Fees and Cost Over Time
CVMC charges 0.15% per year while LOWV charges 0.39%. On a $10,000 position that is $15 vs $39 annually, a gap of $24 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, CVMC currently yields 1.23% against 0.87% for LOWV.
Holdings Overlap
3.4% of CVMC's money is in holdings LOWV also owns. 9.1% of LOWV's money is in holdings CVMC also owns.
LOWV and CVMC share little of their money.
13 positions in common, counted across the 595 positions we hold weights for in CVMC and 68 in LOWV, against full books of 1,184 and 71.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 49 positions for LOWV that do not appear in our book for CVMC (84.4% of the fund), and 571 for CVMC that do not appear in LOWV (94.5%).
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 CVMC | Weight in LOWV | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| KEYSKeysight Technologies Inc. | 0.60% | 1.22% | 0.62% |
| AEEAmeren Corporation Utilities | 0.29% | 1.06% | 0.77% |
| CBOEC B O E Holdings Inc. | 0.26% | 1.03% | 0.77% |
| YUMYum! Brands, Inc. | 0.36% | 0.87% | 0.51% |
| WTW:LNWillis Towers Watson Plc Ordinary Shares | 0.25% | 0.80% | 0.55% |
| AZOAutozone Inc Snr S* Ice | 0.40% | 0.58% | 0.18% |
| DTDynatrace Inc | 0.19% | 0.74% | 0.55% |
| MTBM&T Bank Corp | 0.29% | 0.52% | 0.23% |
| USFDUS Foods Holding Corp | 0.20% | 0.60% | 0.40% |
| RGAReinsurance Group of America, Incorporated | 0.15% | 0.52% | 0.37% |
You are not choosing between two funds in isolation.
Whichever of CVMC and LOWV 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, CVMC or LOWV?
CVMC has an expense ratio of 0.15% while LOWV charges 0.39%. CVMC is the cheaper option, by $24 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, CVMC or LOWV?
Over the past year CVMC returned +18.30% vs +9.29% for LOWV, so CVMC leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (4 years), CVMC annualized +15.05% vs +17.36% for LOWV. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, CVMC or LOWV?
CVMC has been the more volatile fund at 15.6% annualized versus 9.7% for LOWV. Worst drawdown: CVMC -22.5% vs LOWV -13.9%.
Should I hold both CVMC and LOWV?
CVMC and LOWV have a monthly-return correlation of 0.76, 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 CVMC and LOWV?
9.1% of LOWV's money is in holdings CVMC also owns. 9.1% of LOWV's is in holdings CVMC also owns. They hold 13 positions in common, counted across the 595 positions we hold weights for in CVMC and 68 in LOWV.
Which pays a higher dividend, CVMC or LOWV?
CVMC yields 1.23% while LOWV yields 0.87%, so CVMC currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is LOWV better than CVMC?
CVMC has a lower expense ratio. CVMC led over 1Y and 3Y, LOWV over the full window. CVMC is less concentrated, with 5.9% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 42.0%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.