Data as of Oct 28, 2026.

vsCompare their flowsaskIQ about these two fundsAsk the committee about these two funds
Across categories

CGBL vs SHV: Differences, Returns & Fees

Share
Share on XDownload as PDF

Over the year to Oct 28, 2026, CGBL returned +7.1% to SHV's +3.6%; 0% of their weight is in the same names.

askIQ about this page

askIQ about CGBL and SHV

Net assets on Oct 27, 2026: $7.9bn for Capital Group Core Balanced ETF and $21.7bn for iShares 0-1 Year Treasury Bond ETF.

At a glance
+7.1%
CGBL total return, 1 year
+3.6%
SHV total return, 1 year
0.33%
CGBL expense ratio
0.15%
SHV expense ratio

Pair scorecard

SHV costs 0.18 points a year less; their one-year returns differ by 3.5 points; SHV is 2.7 times larger.

CGBL vs SHV: Differences, Returns & Fees
MeasureCGBLSHV
Return
Total return, 1 year+7.1%+3.6%
Drawdown
Below its high3.4%, high on Aug 13, 2026
Benchmark
What it tracksNo index, actively managedICE Short US Treasury Securities Index
Cost and size
Expense ratio0.33%0.15%
Net assets, as of Oct 27, 2026$7.9bn$21.7bn
Holdings
Holdings in common0%
In the S&P 500, by weight48%
Top ten holdings, share of the fund59.3%

Holdings in common uses holdings dated Jun 30, 2026 and Oct 27, 2026. Method

What they share

0%

By the books each fund has filed, CGBL and SHV hold 0% of their money in the same securities at the same weight. Holdings dated Jun 30, 2026 and Oct 27, 2026.

0 half 100%

half

0% in common

Positions both hold · largest shared weight first CGBL SHV
Only in one fund ↓
Only in CGBL
Capital Group Core Plus Income ETF 23.27%
Capital Group Core Bond ETF 15.64%
Broadcom Inc 4.58%
Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co Ltd 3.49%
Alphabet Inc 2.79%
Micron Technology Inc 2.23%
Philip Morris International Inc 2.07%
Apple Inc 2.01%
Only in SHV
TREASURY BILL 4.98%
TREASURY BILL 4.17%
TREASURY BILL 3.90%
TREASURY BILL 3.72%
TREASURY BILL 3.58%
TREASURY BILL 3.48%
TREASURY BILL 3.35%
TREASURY BILL 3.31%
Check overlap with more funds →

Side by side

CGBL Capital Group Core Balanced ETF SHV iShares 0-1 Year Treasury Bond ETF
Where it sits Allocation ETF Bond ETF
What it is Actively managed Tracks an index of 0-1 Year Treasury Bond
Total return, 1 year +7.1% +3.6%
Its benchmark over the same days +7.5% (VOO and AGG) not measured
Gap to its benchmark −0.4 pts vs VOO and AGG not measured
Expense ratio 0.33% 0.15%
Holdings 77 66
Net assets, as of Oct 27, 2026 $7.9bn $21.7bn

CGBL and SHV on the fields both publish, as of Oct 28, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.

Alert

SHV flows, by email on Sundays.

One-click unsubscribe. See Privacy.

About each fund
CGBL

Over the year to Oct 28, 2026 it returned +7.1% with distributions reinvested, against +7.5% for its benchmark, the 60%/40% S&P 500 Index/Bloomberg U.S. Aggregate Index.

CGBL is actively managed and tracks no index. 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 59.3%. It sat 3.4% below its high of Aug 13, 2026 on Oct 28, 2026.

SHV

SHV tracks an index of 0-1 Year Treasury Bond. Over the year to Oct 28, 2026 it returned +3.6% with distributions reinvested. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.15% a year.

Questions people ask

Which returned more over the last year, CGBL or SHV?
In the year to Oct 28, 2026, with distributions reinvested, CGBL returned +7.1% and SHV +3.6%.
Which is cheaper, CGBL or SHV?
SHV is cheaper, by 0.18 percentage points a year. That is about $18 on $10,000 held for a year. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
Other comparisons
Cite this pageCitation, APA and Markdown

ETFIQ, CGBL against SHV, data as of Oct 28, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/any/cgbl-vs-shv

Open data →

Free to use with attribution for data ETFIQ computes; issuer data stays under its owner's terms.