GROZ vs IWFG
Zacks Focus Growth ETF vs NYLIM Winslow Focused Large Cap Growth ETF
Which is better, GROZ or IWFG?
Nearly the same fund. IWFG costs less.
IWFG has a lower expense ratio. GROZ led over 1Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.96. GROZ is less concentrated, with 56.9% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 64.2%.
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 | GROZ | IWFG |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.55% | 0.46%Best |
| AUM | $126M | $27M |
| Dividend Yield | 0.04% | 0.00% |
| Holdings | 88 | 58 |
| YTD Return | +12.37%Best | +3.74% |
| 1Y Return | +15.13%Best | +3.78% |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | - | +22.23% |
| Volatility (annualized) | 16.0%Best | 17.5% |
| Max Drawdown | -23.3% | -22.0%Best |
| $10,000 over 1.9 years | $13,480Best | $11,603 |
| Top 10 Weight | 56.9%Best | 64.2% |
| Fund Family | Zacks | New York Life Investments |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Growth | Large Cap Growth |
| Inception | Sep 9, 2024 | Jun 22, 2022 |
Not shown on this pair: 5Y Return (annualized).
Volatility and max drawdown, and the $10,000 over 1.9 years row, are measured over the window both funds cover: Dec 5, 2024 to Oct 14, 2026 (1.9 years).
GROZ vs IWFG 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 1.9 years both funds cover.
GROZ vs IWFG Performance
Zacks Focus Growth ETF (GROZ) is an ETF from Zacks and NYLIM Winslow Focused Large Cap Growth ETF (IWFG) is an ETF from New York Life Investments. Over the past year GROZ returned +15.13% while IWFG returned +3.78%. Year to date, GROZ is up 12.37% versus a gain of 3.74% for IWFG.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
IWFG has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 17.5% compared with 16.0% for GROZ. 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 -23.3% for GROZ and -22.0% for IWFG. 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
GROZ charges 0.55% per year while IWFG charges 0.46%. On a $10,000 position that is $55 vs $46 annually, a gap of $9 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, GROZ currently yields 0.04% against 0.00% for IWFG.
Holdings Overlap
49.7% of GROZ's money is in holdings IWFG also owns. 59.0% of IWFG's money is in holdings GROZ also owns.
The two portfolios partly overlap.
13 positions in common, counted across the 46 positions we hold weights for in GROZ and 27 in IWFG, against full books of 88 and 58.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 13 positions for IWFG that do not appear in our book for GROZ (38.4% of the fund), and 28 for GROZ that do not appear in IWFG (42.7%).
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 GROZ | Weight in IWFG | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| NVDANvidia Corp | 9.99% | 14.99% | 5.00% |
| AAPLApple, Inc | 9.06% | 5.46% | 3.60% |
| MSFTMicrosoft Corp | 7.29% | 6.57% | 0.72% |
| AMZNAmazon.Com Inc | 3.77% | 6.24% | 2.47% |
| AVGOBroadcom Inc | 5.00% | 3.71% | 1.29% |
| METAMeta Platforms Inc | 3.42% | 4.47% | 1.05% |
| LLYEli Lilly & Co. | 3.34% | 2.96% | 0.38% |
| MAMastercard Inc | 1.40% | 3.51% | 2.11% |
| PLTRPalantir Technologies Inc | 2.00% | 2.79% | 0.79% |
| VVisa Inc Class A | 1.79% | 2.97% | 1.18% |
59.0% of IWFG is already inside GROZ.
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, GROZ or IWFG?
GROZ has an expense ratio of 0.55% while IWFG charges 0.46%. IWFG is the cheaper option, by $9 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, GROZ or IWFG?
Over the past year GROZ returned +15.13% vs +3.78% for IWFG, so GROZ leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (2 years), GROZ annualized +17.02% vs +8.14% for IWFG. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, GROZ or IWFG?
IWFG has been the more volatile fund at 17.5% annualized versus 16.0% for GROZ. Worst drawdown: GROZ -23.3% vs IWFG -22.0%.
Should I hold both GROZ and IWFG?
GROZ and IWFG 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 GROZ and IWFG?
59.0% of IWFG's money is in holdings GROZ also owns. 59.0% of IWFG's is in holdings GROZ also owns. They hold 13 positions in common, counted across the 46 positions we hold weights for in GROZ and 27 in IWFG.
Which pays a higher dividend, GROZ or IWFG?
GROZ yields 0.04% while IWFG yields 0.00%, so GROZ currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is IWFG better than GROZ?
IWFG has a lower expense ratio. GROZ led over 1Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.96. GROZ is less concentrated, with 56.9% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 64.2%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.