AMOM vs LRGC
Qraft AI-Enhanced US Large Cap Momentum ETF vs AB US Large Cap Strategic Equities ETF
Which is better, AMOM or LRGC?
AMOM has been ahead.
LRGC has a lower expense ratio. AMOM led over 1Y, 3Y and the full window. AMOM is less concentrated, with 36.9% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 44.8%.
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 | AMOM | LRGC |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.75% | 0.39%Best |
| AUM | $23M | $1.4B |
| Dividend Yield | 0.00% | 0.53% |
| Holdings | 102 | 72 |
| YTD Return | +19.96%Best | +10.99% |
| 1Y Return | +21.68%Best | +13.29% |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +24.92%Best | +20.81% |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +11.23% | - |
| Volatility (annualized) | 21.8% | 12.5%Best |
| Max Drawdown | -30.3% | -19.4%Best |
| $10,000 over 3.1 years | $19,992Best | $17,762 |
| Top 10 Weight | 36.9%Best | 44.8% |
| Fund Family | QRAFT AI ETFs | AllianceBernstein L.P. |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Growth | Large Cap Growth |
| Inception | May 20, 2019 | Sep 20, 2023 |
Volatility and max drawdown, and the $10,000 over 3.1 years row, are measured over the window both funds cover: Sep 20, 2023 to Oct 14, 2026 (3.1 years).
AMOM vs LRGC 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 3.1 years both funds cover.
AMOM vs LRGC Performance
Qraft AI-Enhanced US Large Cap Momentum ETF (AMOM) is an ETF from QRAFT AI ETFs and AB US Large Cap Strategic Equities ETF (LRGC) is an ETF from AllianceBernstein L.P.. Over the past year AMOM returned +21.68% while LRGC returned +13.29%. Year to date, AMOM is up 19.96% versus a gain of 10.99% for LRGC.
Over three years, AMOM compounded at +24.92% per year against +20.81% for LRGC.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
AMOM has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 21.8% compared with 12.5% for LRGC. 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 -30.3% for AMOM and -19.4% for LRGC. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.77. They usually move together, but the gap leaves some room for diversification.
Fees and Cost Over Time
AMOM charges 0.75% per year while LRGC charges 0.39%. On a $10,000 position that is $75 vs $39 annually, a gap of $36 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, AMOM currently yields 0.00% against 0.53% for LRGC.
Holdings Overlap
27.0% of AMOM's money is in holdings LRGC also owns. 18.6% of LRGC's money is in holdings AMOM also owns.
AMOM and LRGC share little of their money.
8 positions in common, counted across the 50 positions we hold weights for in AMOM and 69 in LRGC, against full books of 102 and 72.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 57 positions for LRGC that do not appear in our book for AMOM (77.4% of the fund), and 42 for AMOM that do not appear in LRGC (72.5%).
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 AMOM | Weight in LRGC | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| NVDANvidia Corp. | 8.55% | 8.71% | 0.16% |
| AVGOBroadcom Inc | 3.89% | 2.93% | 0.96% |
| CSCOCisco Systems Inc. - Ordinary Shares | 3.29% | 1.59% | 1.70% |
| MUMicron Technology, Inc. | 3.23% | 0.76% | 2.47% |
| APHAmphenol Corp. Class A | 2.51% | 0.87% | 1.64% |
| STXSeagate Technology Plc | 2.32% | 0.92% | 1.40% |
| AMATApplied Materials, Inc. | 1.37% | 1.82% | 0.45% |
| INTCIntel Corp. | 1.88% | 0.95% | 0.93% |
27.0% of AMOM is already inside LRGC.
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, AMOM or LRGC?
AMOM has an expense ratio of 0.75% while LRGC charges 0.39%. LRGC is the cheaper option, by $36 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, AMOM or LRGC?
Over the past year AMOM returned +21.68% vs +13.29% for LRGC, so AMOM leads on 1-year performance. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, AMOM or LRGC?
AMOM has been the more volatile fund at 21.8% annualized versus 12.5% for LRGC. Worst drawdown: AMOM -30.3% vs LRGC -19.4%.
Should I hold both AMOM and LRGC?
AMOM and LRGC have a monthly-return correlation of 0.77, so their returns are far enough apart for the mix to behave differently from either one alone. This is information, not a recommendation.
What is the holdings overlap between AMOM and LRGC?
27.0% of AMOM's money is in holdings LRGC also owns. 18.6% of LRGC's is in holdings AMOM also owns. They hold 8 positions in common, counted across the 50 positions we hold weights for in AMOM and 69 in LRGC.
Which pays a higher dividend, AMOM or LRGC?
AMOM yields 0.00% while LRGC yields 0.53%, so LRGC currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is LRGC better than AMOM?
LRGC has a lower expense ratio. AMOM led over 1Y, 3Y and the full window. AMOM is less concentrated, with 36.9% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 44.8%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.