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

In the year to Sep 13, 2026, with distributions reinvested, BWET returned +5129.6% and CGBL returned +9.9%, so BWET returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.

Which is cheaper, BWET or CGBL?

BWET charges 0.15% a year and CGBL charges 0.33%, so BWET is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.

Data as of Sep 13, 2026. Both funds on the fields they both publish, from the same sources.

ETFIQetfiq.com · independent ETF data

BWET vs CGBL: how they differ

BWET is a commodity fund and CGBL an equity index fund, and over the year BWET returned more, +5129.6% against +9.9%.

Breakwave Tanker Shipping ETF and Capital Group Core Balanced ETF.

BWET and CGBL on the fields both publish, as of Sep 13, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.
	BWET Breakwave Tanker Shipping ETF	CGBL Capital Group Core Balanced ETF
Where it sits	Core index fund	Core index fund
Issuer	Breakwave	Capital Group
What it is	Tanker Shipping	Core Balanced
Total return, 1 year	+5129.6%	+9.9%
S&P 500 over the same days	+17.5%	+17.5%
Gap to the S&P 500	+5112.1 pts	−7.6 pts
Expense ratio	0.15%	0.33%
Holdings	not filed	77

BWET in plain words

BWET is a commodity fund tracking the Tanker Shipping. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +5129.6% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.15% 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, BWET or CGBL?: In the year to Sep 13, 2026, with distributions reinvested, BWET returned +5129.6% and CGBL returned +9.9%, so BWET returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.
Which is cheaper, BWET or CGBL?: BWET charges 0.15% a year and CGBL charges 0.33%, so BWET 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.

BWET against CGBL, ETFIQ, data as of Sep 13, 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, BWET against CGBL, data as of Sep 13, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/any/bwet-vs-cgbl Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.

A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources