CGMS ranks 2nd and MFUL 6th of 7 funds in the Conservative Allocation Category.
CGMS vs MFUL
CGMS −1.09pt a year
0.39%1.48%
CGMS 1663.1×the volume
1.2M719
CGMS +2.4pt
+7.2%+4.8%
CGMS vs MFUL Performance
+1.4%+0.4%
- CGMS 0.39%, better
- MFUL 1.48%
- CGMS $5.61B
- MFUL $7M
- CGMS +1.4%, better
- MFUL +0.4%
- CGMS 6.08%, better
- MFUL 1.88%
- CGMS 1551
- MFUL 18
- CGMS 1.2M sh, better
- MFUL 719 sh
- CGMS $26.40
- MFUL $21.91
ETF.net Grade
| Pillar | CGMS | MFUL |
|---|---|---|
| Cost | A75Higher | F19 |
| Mission | A82Higher | A76 |
| Risk | B68Higher | C44 |
| Tradability | A74Higher | D34 |
| Holdings | A84Higher | C51 |
| Durability | A72Higher | C44 |
Rank among Conservative Allocation funds
Same Category. CGMS and MFUL are both graded against the same 7 Conservative Allocation funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
Our read on each fund
CGMSA
MFULC
In short
CGMS Capital Group's bond desk in ETF form: one ticket across the income-producing corners of the US market, roughly 1,200 positions deep, paying monthly. Income first, capital appreciation second.
MFUL Most conservative allocation funds ride out the storm. MFUL's signals can shift up to the entire portfolio into cash or money-market ETFs instead. A 2021-vintage, tactical fund-of-ETFs at 1.48%, no waiver.
Stated mandate
CGMS The fund seeks a high level of current income, with capital appreciation as a secondary objective.
MFUL The Fund seeks current income and is positioned for conservative investors who can tolerate only limited pricing volatility.
Why people hold it
Worth knowing
CGMS vs MFUL 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.
CGMS vs MFUL Cost
Overpaying MFUL vs CGMS
$18,101
On $10,000 over 30 years. 7% growth a year before fees, expense ratio only.
CGMS 0.39%
$7,898
MFUL 1.48%
$25,999
Cost over time
Year by year
| Year | CGMS | MFUL | Overpaying |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10 | $705 | $2,558 | $1,853 |
| 20 | $2,725 | $9,408 | $6,683 |
| 30 | $7,898 | $25,999 | $18,101 |
- 0.39%CGMS, cheaper
- 1.48%MFUL
- Middle half of Conservative Allocation funds
- Median 0.67%
CGMS 2nd cheapest of 7 funds
MFUL 6th cheapest of 7 funds
CGMS vs MFUL Dividends
- CGMS 6.08%, better
- MFUL 1.88%
- CGMS $1.60
- MFUL $0.41
- CGMS $0.12
- MFUL $0.41
- CGMS Oct 30, 2026
- MFUL Dec 16, 2025
- CGMS Nov 2, 2026
- MFUL Dec 17, 2025
- CGMS Monthly
- MFUL Quarterly
Distribution history
CGMS vs MFUL Risk
Fall from peak · 5 years
Risk facts
- Volatility
- CGMS 4.7%MFUL 4.4%, better
- Return per unit of risk
- CGMS 0.71, betterMFUL 0.14
- Worst fall
- CGMS −4.1%MFUL −16.4%
- Market sensitivity
- CGMS 0.72MFUL 0.47
CGMS and MFUL in the news
Popular comparisons
- 0.39% · 0.15%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
- 1.48% · 0.15%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
- 0.39% · 0.67%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
- 1.48% · 0.67%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
- 0.39% · 1.20%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
- 1.48% · 1.20%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.

