Which returned more over the last year, BSV or CGBL?

In the year to Sep 12, 2026, with distributions reinvested, BSV returned +1.1% and CGBL returned +9.9%, so CGBL returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.

Which is cheaper, BSV or CGBL?

BSV charges 0.03% a year and CGBL charges 0.33%, so BSV is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.

Data as of Sep 12, 2026. Both funds on the fields they both publish, from the same sources.

ETFIQetfiq.com · independent ETF data

BSV vs CGBL: how they differ

BSV and CGBL hold 0% of their weight in the same names, and CGBL returned more over the year.

Vanguard Short-Term Bond Index Fund and Capital Group Core Balanced ETF.

What they hold in common

By the books each fund has filed, BSV and CGBL hold 0% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.

Largest positions each one holds and the other does not
Only in BSV	Only in CGBL
United States Treasury Note/Bond 1.13%	Capital Group Core Plus Income ETF 23.22%
United States Treasury Note/Bond 0.90%	Capital Group Core Bond ETF 15.60%
United States Treasury Note/Bond 0.89%	Broadcom Inc 4.57%
United States Treasury Note/Bond 0.82%	Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co Lt 3.48%
United States Treasury Note/Bond 0.81%	Alphabet Inc 2.78%
United States Treasury Note/Bond 0.81%	Micron Technology Inc 2.23%
United States Treasury Note/Bond 0.80%	Philip Morris International Inc 2.07%
United States Treasury Note/Bond 0.78%	Apple Inc 2.00%

Weight overlap is an ETFIQ calculation: for every security both funds hold, the smaller of the two weights, summed. Above 50%, holding both is close to holding one of them twice. Holdings dated Jun 30, 2026.

BSV and CGBL on the fields both publish, as of Sep 12, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.
	BSV Vanguard Short-Term Bond Index Fund	CGBL Capital Group Core Balanced ETF
Where it sits	Core index fund	Core index fund
Issuer	Vanguard	Capital
What it is	Short-Term Bond	Core Balanced
Total return, 1 year	+1.1%	+9.9%
S&P 500 over the same days	+17.5%	+17.5%
Gap to the S&P 500	−16.4 pts	−7.6 pts
Expense ratio	0.03%	0.33%
Holdings	3185	77

BSV in plain words

BSV is a bond fund tracking the Short-Term Bond. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +1.1% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.03% a year.

CGBL in plain words

CGBL is an index equity fund tracking the Core Balanced. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +9.9% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.33% a year. By its holdings filed for Jun 30, 2026, 48% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 77 positions, with the top ten at 59.2%.

Questions people ask

Which returned more over the last year, BSV or CGBL?: In the year to Sep 12, 2026, with distributions reinvested, BSV returned +1.1% and CGBL returned +9.9%, so CGBL returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.
Which is cheaper, BSV or CGBL?: BSV charges 0.03% a year and CGBL charges 0.33%, so BSV is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.

Other comparisons

Where to next

Where these figures came from

ETFIQ links to the documents behind every figure. It is not affiliated with any issuer, and a link is not an endorsement.

BSV against CGBL, ETFIQ, data as of Sep 12, 2026. Every figure is arithmetic on a named public source; the method is at etfiq.com/methodology. A comparison is not a recommendation.

Cite this page. ETFIQ, BSV against CGBL, data as of Sep 12, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/any/BSV-CGBL Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.

A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources