AVMA ranks 3rd and CGBL 4th of 5 funds in the Balanced Allocation Category.
AVMA vs CGBL
AVMA −0.12pt a year
0.21%0.33%
CGBL 137.5×the volume
10.4K1.43M
Same figure. Both funds show the same value, so neither comes out ahead.
+16.8%+16.8%
AVMA vs CGBL Performance
+12.7%+7.5%
- AVMA 0.21%, better
- CGBL 0.33%
- AVMA $94M
- CGBL $7.97B
- AVMA +12.7%, better
- CGBL +7.5%
- AVMA 2.46%, better
- CGBL 1.96%
- AVMA 18
- CGBL 78
- AVMA 10.4K sh
- CGBL 1.43M sh, better
- AVMA $72.14
- CGBL $36.68
ETF.net Grade
| Pillar | AVMA | CGBL |
|---|---|---|
| Cost | B58Higher | D28 |
| Mission | C53 | B69Higher |
| Risk | C52Higher | D36 |
| Tradability | B59 | B69Higher |
| Holdings | A86 | A91Higher |
| Durability | C40 | B67Higher |
Rank among Balanced Allocation funds
Same Category. AVMA and CGBL are both graded against the same 5 Balanced Allocation funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
Our read on each fund
AVMAB
CGBLC
In short
AVMA A one-ticket 65/35 balanced fund built entirely from Avantis' own ETFs, so the stock side leans toward cheaper, more profitable companies instead of simply tracking the market. All-in cost: 0.21%.
CGBL Capital Group's take on the 60/40: one ticket that owns both stocks and bonds, US and international, chasing balanced total return with an eye on preserving capital. Live since 2023 and already a multi-billion-dollar fund.
Stated mandate
AVMA The fund seeks long-term capital appreciation through a strategic allocation providing broad market exposure while emphasizing securities with higher expected returns.
CGBL The fund seeks balanced total return, including income and capital gains, while aiming to preserve capital over the long term.
Why people hold it
Worth knowing
AVMA vs CGBL Holdings
How we measure overlap
Each holding counts at its smaller weight in the two funds, summed over the full Holdings. Sector, country and asset class use the same rule on each fund’s split. Cash, FX and derivative lines stay out of the counts. Two bond funds get no overlap figure.
AVMA vs CGBL Cost
Overpaying CGBL vs AVMA
$2,380
On $10,000 over 30 years. 7% growth a year before fees, expense ratio only.
AVMA 0.21%
$4,357
CGBL 0.33%
$6,737
Cost over time
Year by year
| Year | AVMA | CGBL | Overpaying |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10 | $383 | $598 | $215 |
| 20 | $1,491 | $2,318 | $827 |
| 30 | $4,357 | $6,737 | $2,380 |
- 0.21%AVMA, cheaper
- 0.33%CGBL
- Middle half of Balanced Allocation funds
- Median 0.21%
AVMA 3rd cheapest of 5 funds
CGBL 5th cheapest of 5 funds
AVMA vs CGBL Dividends
- AVMA 2.46%, better
- CGBL 1.96%
- AVMA $1.77
- CGBL $0.72
- AVMA $0.31
- CGBL $0.21
- AVMA Sep 10, 2026
- CGBL Sep 30, 2026
- AVMA Sep 14, 2026
- CGBL Oct 1, 2026
- AVMA Quarterly
- CGBL Quarterly
Distribution history
AVMA vs CGBL Risk
Fall from peak · 5 years
Risk facts
- Volatility
- AVMA 9.0%, betterCGBL 9.2%
- Return per unit of risk
- AVMA 1.29, betterCGBL 1.27
- Worst fall
- AVMA −11.8%CGBL −11.7%
- Market sensitivity
- AVMA 0.91CGBL 0.70
Popular comparisons
- 0.21% · 0.15%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
- 0.33% · 0.15%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
- 0.21% · 0.15%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
- 0.33% · 0.15%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
- 0.21% · 0.25%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
- 0.33% · 0.25%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.