LRGC vs THRO
AB US Large Cap Strategic Equities ETF vs iShares US Thematic Rotation Active ETF
Which is better, LRGC or THRO?
Nearly the same fund. LRGC costs less.
LRGC has a lower expense ratio. THRO led over 1Y, 3Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.95. THRO is less concentrated, with 43.5% 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 | THRO |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.39%Best | 0.57% |
| AUM | $1.4B | $7.5B |
| Dividend Yield | 0.53% | 0.30% |
| Holdings | 72 | 251 |
| YTD Return | +10.99% | +14.55%Best |
| 1Y Return | +13.29% | +18.23%Best |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +20.81% | +23.72%Best |
| Volatility (annualized) | 12.5%Best | 13.8% |
| Max Drawdown | -19.4% | -19.1%Best |
| $10,000 over 3.1 years | $17,762 | $18,993Best |
| Top 10 Weight | 44.8% | 43.5%Best |
| Fund Family | AllianceBernstein L.P. | BlackRock, Inc. (US) |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Growth | Large Cap Growth |
| Inception | Sep 20, 2023 | Dec 14, 2021 |
Not shown on this pair: 5Y Return (annualized).
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 THRO 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 THRO Performance
AB US Large Cap Strategic Equities ETF (LRGC) is an ETF from AllianceBernstein L.P. and iShares US Thematic Rotation Active ETF (THRO) is an ETF from BlackRock, Inc. (US). Over the past year LRGC returned +13.29% while THRO returned +18.23%. Year to date, LRGC is up 10.99% versus a gain of 14.55% for THRO.
Over three years, LRGC compounded at +20.81% per year against +23.72% for THRO.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
THRO has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 13.8% 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 -19.1% for THRO. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.95. 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 THRO charges 0.57%. On a $10,000 position that is $39 vs $57 annually, a gap of $18 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, LRGC currently yields 0.53% against 0.30% for THRO.
Holdings Overlap
76.3% of LRGC's money is in holdings THRO also owns. 56.5% of THRO's money is in holdings LRGC also owns.
Most of LRGC is already inside THRO. Owning both mostly buys the same companies twice.
40 positions in common, counted across the 69 positions we hold weights for in LRGC and 247 in THRO, against full books of 72 and 251.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 125 positions for THRO that do not appear in our book for LRGC (42.4% of the fund), and 25 for LRGC that do not appear in THRO (19.6%).
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 THRO | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| NVDANvidia Corp | 8.71% | 8.58% | 0.13% |
| AAPLApple, Inc | 5.71% | 8.21% | 2.50% |
| MSFTMicrosoft Corp | 6.66% | 6.24% | 0.42% |
| AMZNAmazon.Com Inc | 4.69% | 4.47% | 0.22% |
| GOOGAlphabet Inc. C | 6.09% | 1.87% | 4.22% |
| METAMeta Platforms Inc | 3.44% | 1.97% | 1.47% |
| VVisa Inc Class A | 3.14% | 1.90% | 1.24% |
| AVGOBroadcom Inc | 2.93% | 2.11% | 0.82% |
| XOMExxonmobil Corp. | 1.61% | 2.51% | 0.90% |
| AMATApplied Materials, Inc. | 1.82% | 1.63% | 0.19% |
76.3% of LRGC is already inside THRO.
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 THRO?
LRGC has an expense ratio of 0.39% while THRO charges 0.57%. LRGC is the cheaper option, by $18 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, LRGC or THRO?
Over the past year LRGC returned +13.29% vs +18.23% for THRO, so THRO leads on 1-year performance. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, LRGC or THRO?
THRO has been the more volatile fund at 13.8% annualized versus 12.5% for LRGC. Worst drawdown: LRGC -19.4% vs THRO -19.1%.
Should I hold both LRGC and THRO?
LRGC and THRO have a monthly-return correlation of 0.95, 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 THRO?
76.3% of LRGC's money is in holdings THRO also owns. 56.5% of THRO'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 247 in THRO.
Which pays a higher dividend, LRGC or THRO?
LRGC yields 0.53% while THRO yields 0.30%, so LRGC currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is THRO better than LRGC?
LRGC has a lower expense ratio. THRO led over 1Y, 3Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.95. THRO is less concentrated, with 43.5% 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.