A worked example
Start with $10,000, end with $16,000 after 5 years: CAGR = (16000/10000)^(1/5) - 1 = 1.6^0.2 - 1 β 9.86%. This does not mean the investment grew by exactly 9.86% every single year β some years may have been up 30%, others down 10% β it means a hypothetical steady 9.86% annual growth rate would have produced the same overall result.
Why CAGR can be misleading on its own
Because CAGR only uses the start and end points, it completely ignores the volatility and drawdowns experienced in between. Two investments with the identical CAGR can have had wildly different risk profiles along the way, one steady and one that dropped sharply before recovering, so CAGR should be read alongside a volatility or risk measure, not as a complete picture of an investment's quality by itself.
Frequently Asked Questions
Is CAGR the same as "annualized return" or "average annual return" you see quoted in ads?
"CAGR" and "annualized return" generally refer to the same compounding-based calculation. "Average annual return," if it means a simple arithmetic average of yearly returns, is a different and usually more misleading number, since it overstates results for volatile investments, as shown by the +50%/-50% example.
Can CAGR be negative?
Yes β if the ending value is lower than the beginning value, the formula produces a negative percentage, correctly reflecting an overall loss annualized over the period.