LRGC vs QRFT
AB US Large Cap Strategic Equities ETF vs Qraft AI-Enhanced US Large Cap ETF
Which is better, LRGC or QRFT?
Nearly the same fund. LRGC costs less.
LRGC has a lower expense ratio. QRFT led over 1Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.96. LRGC is less concentrated, with 44.8% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 45.5%.
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 | QRFT |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.39%Best | 0.75% |
| AUM | $1.4B | $9M |
| Dividend Yield | 0.53% | 0.25% |
| Holdings | 72 | 301 |
| Volatility (annualized) | 13.0%Best | 14.0% |
| Max Drawdown | -19.4%Best | -20.0% |
| $10,000 over 2.8 years | $17,172 | $17,291Best |
| Top 10 Weight | 44.8%Best | 45.5% |
| Fund Family | AllianceBernstein L.P. | QRAFT AI ETFs |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Growth | Large Cap Growth |
| Inception | Sep 20, 2023 | May 20, 2019 |
Not shown on this pair: YTD Return, 1Y Return, 3Y Return (annualized), 5Y Return (annualized).
The two price series end 85 days apart, so a return over any period would be measuring two different stretches of market. Those rows are withheld. LRGC has data through Oct 14, 2026 and QRFT through Jul 21, 2026.
Volatility and max drawdown, and the $10,000 over 2.8 years row, are measured over the window both funds cover: Sep 20, 2023 to Jul 21, 2026 (2.8 years).
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
QRFT has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 14.0% compared with 13.0% 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 -20.0% for QRFT. 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
LRGC charges 0.39% per year while QRFT charges 0.75%. On a $10,000 position that is $39 vs $75 annually, a gap of $36 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, LRGC currently yields 0.53% against 0.25% for QRFT.
Holdings Overlap
62.9% of LRGC's money is in holdings QRFT also owns. 51.4% of QRFT's money is in holdings LRGC also owns.
The two portfolios partly overlap.
The two holdings books were reported 155 days apart, LRGC as of Oct 2, 2026 and QRFT as of Apr 30, 2026, so some of the difference between them is the time between the two reports rather than the funds.
40 positions in common, counted across the 69 positions we hold weights for in LRGC and 294 in QRFT, against full books of 72 and 301.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 240 positions for QRFT that do not appear in our book for LRGC (46.0% of the fund), and 24 for LRGC that do not appear in QRFT (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 LRGC | Weight in QRFT | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| NVDANvidia Corp | 8.71% | 9.65% | 0.94% |
| AAPLApple, Inc | 5.71% | 9.21% | 3.50% |
| AMZNAmazon.Com Inc | 4.69% | 5.92% | 1.23% |
| AVGOBroadcom Inc | 2.93% | 4.11% | 1.18% |
| METAMeta Platforms Inc | 3.44% | 2.76% | 0.68% |
| XOMExxonmobil Corp. | 1.61% | 1.35% | 0.26% |
| LLYEli Lilly & Co. | 0.80% | 2.00% | 1.20% |
| WMTWalmart, Inc. | 0.53% | 2.17% | 1.64% |
| AMATApplied Materials, Inc. | 1.82% | 0.71% | 1.11% |
| CSCOCisco Systems Inc. - Ordinary Shares | 1.59% | 0.94% | 0.65% |
62.9% of LRGC is already inside QRFT.
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, LRGC or QRFT?
LRGC has an expense ratio of 0.39% while QRFT charges 0.75%. LRGC is the cheaper option, by $36 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which is riskier, LRGC or QRFT?
QRFT has been the more volatile fund at 14.0% annualized versus 13.0% for LRGC. Worst drawdown: LRGC -19.4% vs QRFT -20.0%.
Should I hold both LRGC and QRFT?
LRGC and QRFT 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 LRGC and QRFT?
62.9% of LRGC's money is in holdings QRFT also owns. 51.4% of QRFT's is in holdings LRGC also owns. They hold 40 positions in common, counted across the 69 positions we hold weights for in LRGC and 294 in QRFT.
Which pays a higher dividend, LRGC or QRFT?
LRGC yields 0.53% while QRFT yields 0.25%, so LRGC currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is QRFT better than LRGC?
LRGC has a lower expense ratio. QRFT led over 1Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.96. LRGC is less concentrated, with 44.8% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 45.5%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.