GRW vs LCLG
TCW Durable Growth ETF vs Logan Capital Large Cap Growth ETF
Which is better, GRW or LCLG?
LCLG has been ahead.
GRW has a lower expense ratio. LCLG led over 1Y and the full window. LCLG is less concentrated, with 45.6% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 52.3%.
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 | GRW | LCLG |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.75%Best | 0.90% |
| AUM | $64M | $108M |
| Dividend Yield | 0.00% | 0.00% |
| Holdings | 64 | 114 |
| YTD Return | +0.53% | +10.21%Best |
| 1Y Return | -2.86% | +13.02%Best |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | - | +25.89% |
| Volatility (annualized) | 16.4%Best | 18.6% |
| Max Drawdown | -31.5% | -25.8%Best |
| $10,000 over 2.4 years | $9,712 | $15,536Best |
| Top 10 Weight | 52.3% | 45.6%Best |
| Fund Family | TCW ETFs | Logan Capital |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Growth | Large Cap Growth |
| Inception | May 5, 2024 | Aug 8, 2022 |
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).
GRW vs LCLG 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.
GRW vs LCLG Performance
TCW Durable Growth ETF (GRW) is an ETF from TCW ETFs and Logan Capital Large Cap Growth ETF (LCLG) is an ETF from Logan Capital. Over the past year GRW returned -2.86% while LCLG returned +13.02%. Year to date, GRW is up 0.53% versus a gain of 10.21% for LCLG.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
LCLG has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 18.6% compared with 16.4% for GRW. 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 -31.5% for GRW and -25.8% for LCLG. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.64. They move together some of the time, and apart the rest.
Fees and Cost Over Time
GRW charges 0.75% per year while LCLG charges 0.90%. On a $10,000 position that is $75 vs $90 annually, a gap of $15 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, GRW currently yields 0.00% against 0.00% for LCLG.
Holdings Overlap
28.0% of GRW's money is in holdings LCLG also owns. 20.8% of LCLG's money is in holdings GRW also owns.
GRW and LCLG share little of their money.
8 positions in common, counted across the 30 positions we hold weights for in GRW and 55 in LCLG, against full books of 64 and 114.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 44 positions for LCLG that do not appear in our book for GRW (76.4% of the fund), and 20 for GRW that do not appear in LCLG (62.5%).
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 GRW | Weight in LCLG | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| AVGOBroadcom Inc | 5.87% | 4.43% | 1.44% |
| GOOGLAlphabet Inc | 4.41% | 3.67% | 0.74% |
| MAMastercard Inc | 3.08% | 3.56% | 0.48% |
| GEGeneral Electric Co. | 5.49% | 0.93% | 4.56% |
| AMZNAmazon.Com Inc | 1.91% | 3.86% | 1.95% |
| ETNEaton Corp Plc | 3.56% | 1.12% | 2.44% |
| NFLXNetflix, Inc. | 1.73% | 2.55% | 0.82% |
| LPLALpl Holdings | 1.91% | 0.63% | 1.28% |
28.0% of GRW is already inside LCLG.
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, GRW or LCLG?
GRW has an expense ratio of 0.75% while LCLG charges 0.90%. GRW is the cheaper option, by $15 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, GRW or LCLG?
Over the past year GRW returned -2.86% vs +13.02% for LCLG, so LCLG leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (2 years), GRW annualized -1.21% vs +20.15% for LCLG. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, GRW or LCLG?
LCLG has been the more volatile fund at 18.6% annualized versus 16.4% for GRW. Worst drawdown: GRW -31.5% vs LCLG -25.8%.
Should I hold both GRW and LCLG?
GRW and LCLG have a monthly-return correlation of 0.64, 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 GRW and LCLG?
28.0% of GRW's money is in holdings LCLG also owns. 20.8% of LCLG's is in holdings GRW also owns. They hold 8 positions in common, counted across the 30 positions we hold weights for in GRW and 55 in LCLG.
Which pays a higher dividend, GRW or LCLG?
GRW yields 0.00% while LCLG yields 0.00%, so LCLG currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is LCLG better than GRW?
GRW has a lower expense ratio. LCLG led over 1Y and the full window. LCLG is less concentrated, with 45.6% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 52.3%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.