BCHP vs GRW
Principal Focused Blue Chip ETF vs TCW Durable Growth ETF
Which is better, BCHP or GRW?
BCHP has been ahead.
BCHP has a lower expense ratio. BCHP led over 1Y and the full window. GRW is less concentrated, with 52.3% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 72.9%.
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 | BCHP | GRW |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.58%Best | 0.75% |
| AUM | $235M | $64M |
| Dividend Yield | 0.00% | 0.00% |
| Holdings | 52 | 64 |
| YTD Return | +1.56%Best | +0.53% |
| 1Y Return | +1.49%Best | -2.86% |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +14.49% | - |
| Volatility (annualized) | 15.1%Best | 16.4% |
| Max Drawdown | -18.6%Best | -31.5% |
| $10,000 over 2.4 years | $12,109Best | $9,712 |
| Top 10 Weight | 72.9% | 52.3%Best |
| Fund Family | Principal Funds | TCW ETFs |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Growth | Large Cap Growth |
| Inception | Jul 12, 2023 | May 5, 2024 |
Not shown on this pair: 5Y Return (annualized).
Volatility and max drawdown, and the $10,000 over 2.4 years row, are measured over the window both funds cover: May 7, 2024 to Oct 14, 2026 (2.4 years).
BCHP vs GRW 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 2.4 years both funds cover.
BCHP vs GRW Performance
Principal Focused Blue Chip ETF (BCHP) is an ETF from Principal Funds and TCW Durable Growth ETF (GRW) is an ETF from TCW ETFs. Over the past year BCHP returned +1.49% while GRW returned -2.86%. Year to date, BCHP is up 1.56% versus a gain of 0.53% for GRW.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
GRW has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 16.4% compared with 15.1% for BCHP. 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 -18.6% for BCHP and -31.5% for GRW. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.59. They move together some of the time, and apart the rest.
Fees and Cost Over Time
BCHP charges 0.58% per year while GRW charges 0.75%. On a $10,000 position that is $58 vs $75 annually, a gap of $17 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, BCHP currently yields 0.00% against 0.00% for GRW.
Holdings Overlap
59.6% of BCHP's money is in holdings GRW also owns. 47.4% of GRW's money is in holdings BCHP also owns.
The two portfolios partly overlap.
12 positions in common, counted across the 24 positions we hold weights for in BCHP and 30 in GRW, against full books of 52 and 64.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 17 positions for GRW that do not appear in our book for BCHP (44.6% of the fund), and 11 for BCHP that do not appear in GRW (33.1%).
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 BCHP | Weight in GRW | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| NVDANvidia Corporation (purchase Right At $310.00 Per Share) | 11.77% | 6.69% | 5.08% |
| MSFTMicrosoft Corp | 10.45% | 5.83% | 4.62% |
| AMZNAmazon.Com Inc | 10.33% | 1.91% | 8.42% |
| TDGTransdigm Group Inc. | 4.79% | 6.91% | 2.12% |
| AVGOBroadcom Inc | 4.81% | 5.87% | 1.06% |
| MAMastercard Inc | 4.52% | 3.08% | 1.44% |
| VVisa Inc Class A | 4.05% | 3.26% | 0.79% |
| GEGeneral Electric Co. | 1.00% | 5.49% | 4.49% |
| CDNSCadence Design Systems Inc. | 3.48% | 1.91% | 1.57% |
| HLTHilton Worldwide Holdings Inc. | 1.20% | 3.21% | 2.01% |
59.6% of BCHP is already inside GRW.
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, BCHP or GRW?
BCHP has an expense ratio of 0.58% while GRW charges 0.75%. BCHP is the cheaper option, by $17 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, BCHP or GRW?
Over the past year BCHP returned +1.49% vs -2.86% for GRW, so BCHP leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (2 years), BCHP annualized +8.30% vs -1.21% for GRW. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, BCHP or GRW?
GRW has been the more volatile fund at 16.4% annualized versus 15.1% for BCHP. Worst drawdown: BCHP -18.6% vs GRW -31.5%.
Should I hold both BCHP and GRW?
BCHP and GRW have a monthly-return correlation of 0.59, 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 BCHP and GRW?
59.6% of BCHP's money is in holdings GRW also owns. 47.4% of GRW's is in holdings BCHP also owns. They hold 12 positions in common, counted across the 24 positions we hold weights for in BCHP and 30 in GRW.
Which pays a higher dividend, BCHP or GRW?
BCHP yields 0.00% while GRW yields 0.00%, so GRW currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is GRW better than BCHP?
BCHP has a lower expense ratio. BCHP led over 1Y and the full window. GRW is less concentrated, with 52.3% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 72.9%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.