LRGC vs MILN
AB US Large Cap Strategic Equities ETF vs Global X Millennial Consumer ETF
Which is better, LRGC or MILN?
LRGC has been ahead.
LRGC has a lower expense ratio. LRGC led over 1Y, 3Y and the full window. MILN is less concentrated, with 33.8% 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 | LRGC | MILN |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.39%Best | 0.50% |
| AUM | $1.4B | $89M |
| Dividend Yield | 0.53% | 0.33% |
| Holdings | 72 | 164 |
| YTD Return | +10.99%Best | -7.25% |
| 1Y Return | +13.29%Best | -10.86% |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +20.81%Best | +12.75% |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | - | -0.22% |
| Volatility (annualized) | 12.5%Best | 17.7% |
| Max Drawdown | -19.4%Best | -23.5% |
| $10,000 over 3.1 years | $17,762Best | $14,115 |
| Top 10 Weight | 44.8% | 33.8%Best |
| Fund Family | AllianceBernstein L.P. | Global X by mirae Asset |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Growth | Large Cap Growth |
| Inception | Sep 20, 2023 | May 4, 2016 |
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).
LRGC vs MILN 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.
LRGC vs MILN Performance
AB US Large Cap Strategic Equities ETF (LRGC) is an ETF from AllianceBernstein L.P. and Global X Millennial Consumer ETF (MILN) is an ETF from Global X by mirae Asset. Over the past year LRGC returned +13.29% while MILN returned -10.86%. Year to date, LRGC is up 10.99% versus a loss of 7.25% for MILN.
Over three years, LRGC compounded at +20.81% per year against +12.75% for MILN.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
MILN has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 17.7% 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 -19.4% for LRGC and -23.5% for MILN. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.82. They usually move together, but the gap leaves some room for diversification.
Fees and Cost Over Time
LRGC charges 0.39% per year while MILN charges 0.50%. On a $10,000 position that is $39 vs $50 annually, a gap of $11 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, LRGC currently yields 0.53% against 0.33% for MILN.
Holdings Overlap
17.0% of LRGC's money is in holdings MILN also owns. 18.7% of MILN's money is in holdings LRGC also owns.
MILN and LRGC share little of their money.
6 positions in common, counted across the 69 positions we hold weights for in LRGC and 80 in MILN, against full books of 72 and 164.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 72 positions for MILN that do not appear in our book for LRGC (77.1% of the fund), and 59 for LRGC that do not appear in MILN (78.9%).
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.
You are not choosing between two funds in isolation.
Whichever of LRGC and MILN you pick has to sit alongside everything else you own. Add the rest and see what the combination actually holds.
Free for up to 10 holdings. No account needed.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, LRGC or MILN?
LRGC has an expense ratio of 0.39% while MILN charges 0.50%. LRGC is the cheaper option, by $11 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, LRGC or MILN?
Over the past year LRGC returned +13.29% vs -10.86% for MILN, so LRGC leads on 1-year performance. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, LRGC or MILN?
MILN has been the more volatile fund at 17.7% annualized versus 12.5% for LRGC. Worst drawdown: LRGC -19.4% vs MILN -23.5%.
Should I hold both LRGC and MILN?
LRGC and MILN have a monthly-return correlation of 0.82, 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 LRGC and MILN?
18.7% of MILN's money is in holdings LRGC also owns. 18.7% of MILN's is in holdings LRGC also owns. They hold 6 positions in common, counted across the 69 positions we hold weights for in LRGC and 80 in MILN.
Which pays a higher dividend, LRGC or MILN?
LRGC yields 0.53% while MILN yields 0.33%, so LRGC currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is MILN better than LRGC?
LRGC has a lower expense ratio. LRGC led over 1Y, 3Y and the full window. MILN is less concentrated, with 33.8% 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.