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

In the year to Oct 28, 2026, with distributions reinvested, CGBL returned +7.1% and USO +133.3%.

Which is cheaper, CGBL or USO?

CGBL is cheaper, by 0.53 percentage points a year. That is about $53 on $10,000 held for a year. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.

Data as of Oct 28, 2026.

Across categories

CGBL vs USO: Differences, Returns & Fees

Share on X Download as PDF

CGBL is an actively managed equity fund and USO a commodity futures fund, and over the year to Oct 28, 2026, USO returned +133.3% against +7.1%.

askIQ about this page

askIQ about CGBL and USO

Net assets: $7.9bn on Oct 27, 2026 for Capital Group Core Balanced ETF, and $1.9bn on Oct 28, 2026 for United States Oil Fund, LP.

CGBL on its own →USO on its own →

At a glance

+7.1%

CGBL total return, 1 year

+133.3%

USO total return, 1 year

0.33%

CGBL expense ratio

0.86%

USO expense ratio

Pair scorecard

CGBL costs 0.53 points a year less; their one-year returns differ by 126.2 points; CGBL is 4.2 times larger.

CGBL vs USO: Differences, Returns & Fees
Measure	CGBL	USO
Return
Measure	CGBL	USO
Total return, 1 year	+7.1%	+133.3%
Drawdown
Measure	CGBL	USO
Below its high	3.4%, high on Aug 13, 2026	82.3%, high on Jul 14, 2008
Benchmark
Measure	CGBL	USO
What it tracks	No index, actively managed	Oil futures
Cost and size
Measure	CGBL	USO
Expense ratio	0.33%	0.86%
Net assets, as of Oct 27, 2026	$7.9bn	$1.9bn
Holdings
Measure	CGBL	USO
Holdings in common	not published
In the S&P 500, by weight	48%
Holdings dated	Jun 30, 2026
Top ten holdings, share of the fund	59.3%

Method

Side by side

CGBL Capital Group Core Balanced ETF USO United States Oil Fund, LP

Where it sits Allocation ETF Commodity ETF

Issuer Capital Group USCF

What it is Actively managed Holds oil futures

Total return, 1 year +7.1% +133.3%

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% 0.86%

Holdings 77 not counted

Net assets, CGBL as of Oct 27, 2026 and USO as of Oct 28, 2026 $7.9bn $1.9bn

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

Alert

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.

USO

USO holds oil futures. Over the year to Oct 28, 2026 it returned +133.3% with distributions reinvested. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.86% a year. It sat 82.3% below its high of Jul 14, 2008 on Oct 28, 2026.

Questions people ask

Which returned more over the last year, CGBL or USO?: In the year to Oct 28, 2026, with distributions reinvested, CGBL returned +7.1% and USO +133.3%.
Which is cheaper, CGBL or USO?: CGBL is cheaper, by 0.53 percentage points a year. That is about $53 on $10,000 held for a year. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.

Other comparisons

BWET vs CGBL CGBL vs SLV CGBL vs GLD CGBL vs SIVR AOR vs USO BITO vs USO USO vs USOY PDBC vs USO

Where to next

CGBL on its own →USO on its own →Hold both: look the portfolio through →Rankings →CGBL dividend history →CGBL holdings →Standards and sources →

Sources and dates

CGBL filings on SEC EDGAR ↗

CGBL prospectus with the expense ratio (SEC) ↗

Capital Group page for CGBL ↗

USCF website ↗

Links are sources, not endorsements. A comparison is not a recommendation.

Cite this pageCitation, APA and Markdown

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

Open data →

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