CAGR v Aunnualized Returns

Not 100% sure on this one, but my assumption would be that CAGR would be the average compounded rate over the life of the investment, while annualized returns would be the returns each individual year.

You generally "annualize" a return when you see a data that shows the return of a term that's less than a year. The return is computed as if the rate were for a year. If you're comparing the returns of two stocks and you have the 1 month return data of one stock and the 3 month return data of another stock, then you usually can't instantly tell which is better because it's like comparing apples and oranges. So you can annualize both of them to compare them on an "apples to apples" basis.

CAGR is kind of like the average growth rate of something over several years. In 99% of situations, the growth rate of something changes every year (whether it's sales, profits, etc.) but CAGR is basically what the growth rate would be, if something was growing every year at a constant, steady rate.

It's kind of hard to explain but hope that helps.

They are mathematically the same thing. You just see the term "CAGR" used more by consultants.

You should not annualize rates of return on anything less than a year.

They are the same.

I've rarely seen CAGR used in discussing investment performance, more for description of company growth.

"Growth rate" and "return" are mathematically the same but are very different in usage. "Return" is a sub catagory of "growth rate".

"Return" usually requires capital outlay up front, i.e., investments, bonds, stocks, etc.

"Growth rate" can be used in a more general sense, such as growth rate of your investments, Revenue growth, EPS growth rate, etc.