CGO vs VTI
Calamos Global Total Return Fund vs Vanguard Morningstar Total Stock Market ETF
Quick Verdict
VTI has a lower expense ratio. VTI delivered stronger 1-year returns. VTI offers more diversification with 3,543 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | CGO | VTI | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 2.30% | 0.03% | |
| AUM | $210M | $666.9B | |
| Dividend Yield | 5.70% | 1.07% | |
| Holdings | 714 | 3,543 | |
| YTD Return | +19.38% | +13.38% | |
| 1Y Return | +20.68% | +21.12% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +22.50% | +21.85% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +5.20% | +12.44% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 20.9% | 15.3% | |
| Max Drawdown | -67.0% | -56.6% | |
| Fund Family | Calamos Investments | Vanguard (US) | |
| Category | Allocation/Balanced | Equity | |
| Inception | Oct 27, 2005 | May 24, 2001 |
CGO vs VTI Performance
Calamos Global Total Return Fund (CGO) is a ETF from Calamos Investments and Vanguard Morningstar Total Stock Market ETF (VTI) is a ETF from Vanguard (US). Over the past year CGO returned +20.68% while VTI returned +21.12%. Year to date, CGO is up 19.38% versus a gain of 13.38% for VTI.
Over three years, CGO compounded at +22.50% per year against +21.85% for VTI; over five years the annualized figures are +5.20% and +12.44% respectively. Across the full 21-year window we track, VTI has the edge at +8.10% annualized vs +1.75%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
CGO has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 20.9% compared with 15.3% for VTI. Lower volatility generally means a smoother ride, though it often comes with lower long-run returns.
The deepest peak-to-trough decline in our data was -67.0% for CGO and -56.6% for VTI. Drawdown depth is worth weighing if you expect to sell during market stress rather than ride it out.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.80. They usually move together, but the gap leaves some room for diversification.
Fees and Cost Over Time
CGO charges 2.30% per year while VTI charges 0.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $230 vs $3 annually, a gap of $227 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, CGO currently yields 5.70% against 1.07% for VTI.
Holdings Overlap
CGO and VTI share 167 holdings out of 3113 unique holdings combined, representing a 18.5% weight overlap.
Moderate overlap means holding both could provide meaningful diversification benefits.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, CGO or VTI?
CGO has an expense ratio of 2.30% while VTI charges 0.03%. VTI is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $227 per year of difference.
Which performed better, CGO or VTI?
Over the past year CGO returned +20.68% vs +21.12% for VTI, so VTI leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (21 years), CGO annualized +1.75% vs +8.10% for VTI. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, CGO or VTI?
CGO has been the more volatile fund at 20.9% annualized versus 15.3% for VTI. Worst drawdown: CGO -67.0% vs VTI -56.6%.
Should I hold both CGO and VTI?
CGO and VTI have a monthly-return correlation of 0.80, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between CGO and VTI?
CGO and VTI share 167 common holdings with a 18.5% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 3113 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, CGO or VTI?
CGO yields 5.70% while VTI yields 1.07%, so CGO currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Popular ETF Comparisons
Get Full ETF Analytics
Access complete holdings data, overlap analysis, screener tools, and more with FundXLS.