AGRW vs IWLG
Allspring LT Large Growth ETF vs NYLIM Winslow Large Cap Growth ETF
Which is better, AGRW or IWLG?
Nearly the same fund. AGRW costs less.
AGRW has a lower expense ratio. AGRW led over 1Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.96. AGRW is less concentrated, with 53.5% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 57.9%.
MarketXLS is not an investment adviser. This comparison is generated automatically from market data and is for information only. A Best mark means the better reading on that one measure, not a recommendation to buy.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | AGRW | IWLG |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.35%Best | 0.50% |
| AUM | $118M | $327M |
| Dividend Yield | 0.11% | 0.00% |
| Holdings | 51 | 82 |
| YTD Return | +9.38%Best | +5.96% |
| 1Y Return | +10.78%Best | +6.77% |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | - | +22.06% |
| Volatility (annualized) | 16.3%Best | 17.1% |
| Max Drawdown | -16.5%Best | -19.4% |
| $10,000 over 1.5 years | $13,295Best | $12,781 |
| Top 10 Weight | 53.5%Best | 57.9% |
| Fund Family | Allspring Global Investments | New York Life Investments |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Growth | Large Cap Growth |
| Inception | Mar 26, 2025 | Jun 22, 2022 |
Not shown on this pair: 5Y Return (annualized).
Volatility and max drawdown, and the $10,000 over 1.5 years row, are measured over the window both funds cover: Mar 27, 2025 to Oct 14, 2026 (1.5 years).
AGRW vs IWLG growth
Month-end closes. Both lines start at 0% in the first month shown, so the gap between them is the difference in growth across that window. The full view covers the 1.5 years both funds cover.
AGRW vs IWLG Performance
Allspring LT Large Growth ETF (AGRW) is an ETF from Allspring Global Investments and NYLIM Winslow Large Cap Growth ETF (IWLG) is an ETF from New York Life Investments. Over the past year AGRW returned +10.78% while IWLG returned +6.77%. Year to date, AGRW is up 9.38% versus a gain of 5.96% for IWLG.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
IWLG has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 17.1% compared with 16.3% for AGRW. 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 -16.5% for AGRW and -19.4% for IWLG. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.96. They move almost in lockstep, so holding both mostly duplicates the same exposure.
Fees and Cost Over Time
AGRW charges 0.35% per year while IWLG charges 0.50%. On a $10,000 position that is $35 vs $50 annually, a gap of $15 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, AGRW currently yields 0.11% against 0.00% for IWLG.
Holdings Overlap
66.6% of AGRW's money is in holdings IWLG also owns. 69.9% of IWLG's money is in holdings AGRW also owns.
The two portfolios partly overlap.
19 positions in common, counted across the 47 positions we hold weights for in AGRW and 37 in IWLG, against full books of 51 and 82.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 15 positions for IWLG that do not appear in our book for AGRW (24.5% of the fund), and 26 for AGRW that do not appear in IWLG (30.6%).
Some of those will be the same company recorded under a different code in one of the two books, so the real difference in what you would own is no larger than this and may be smaller. We do not name the individual positions here for that reason.
Top Shared Holdings
| Stock | Weight in AGRW | Weight in IWLG | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| NVDANvidia Corp | 15.57% | 14.02% | 1.55% |
| GOOGAlphabet Inc. C | 8.42% | 10.62% | 2.20% |
| MSFTMicrosoft Corp | 4.18% | 6.96% | 2.78% |
| AAPLApple, Inc | 4.53% | 4.31% | 0.22% |
| METAMeta Platforms Inc | 4.28% | 3.48% | 0.80% |
| AVGOBroadcom Inc | 4.29% | 2.95% | 1.34% |
| AMZNAmazon.Com Inc | 3.95% | 3.08% | 0.87% |
| ANETArista Networks Inc Common Stock | 2.63% | 3.71% | 1.08% |
| LLYEli Lilly & Co. | 2.15% | 3.71% | 1.56% |
| VVisa Inc Class A | 2.36% | 3.27% | 0.91% |
69.9% of IWLG is already inside AGRW.
You probably hold more than these two. Add the rest and see how much of the whole book is the same companies twice.
Free for up to 10 holdings. No account needed.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, AGRW or IWLG?
AGRW has an expense ratio of 0.35% while IWLG charges 0.50%. AGRW is the cheaper option, by $15 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, AGRW or IWLG?
Over the past year AGRW returned +10.78% vs +6.77% for IWLG, so AGRW leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (2 years), AGRW annualized +20.91% vs +17.77% for IWLG. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, AGRW or IWLG?
IWLG has been the more volatile fund at 17.1% annualized versus 16.3% for AGRW. Worst drawdown: AGRW -16.5% vs IWLG -19.4%.
Should I hold both AGRW and IWLG?
AGRW and IWLG have a monthly-return correlation of 0.96, so they move almost identically. What is left to separate them is the fee and the index each one tracks. This is information, not a recommendation.
What is the holdings overlap between AGRW and IWLG?
69.9% of IWLG's money is in holdings AGRW also owns. 69.9% of IWLG's is in holdings AGRW also owns. They hold 19 positions in common, counted across the 47 positions we hold weights for in AGRW and 37 in IWLG.
Which pays a higher dividend, AGRW or IWLG?
AGRW yields 0.11% while IWLG yields 0.00%, so AGRW currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is IWLG better than AGRW?
AGRW has a lower expense ratio. AGRW led over 1Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.96. AGRW is less concentrated, with 53.5% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 57.9%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.