PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
ACGR vs. HLAL
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

ACGR vs. HLAL - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in American Century Large Cap Growth ETF (ACGR) and Wahed FTSE USA Shariah ETF (HLAL). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ACGR achieves a 8.73% return, which is significantly lower than HLAL's 18.72% return.


ACGR

1D
-0.45%
1M
7.07%
YTD
8.73%
6M
8.10%
1Y
26.66%
3Y*
21.94%
5Y*
15.34%
10Y*

HLAL

1D
-0.07%
1M
9.45%
YTD
18.72%
6M
17.75%
1Y
43.63%
3Y*
22.04%
5Y*
15.86%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

ACGR vs. HLAL - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020
ACGR
American Century Large Cap Growth ETF
8.73%14.50%26.66%43.24%-30.13%39.24%11.27%
HLAL
Wahed FTSE USA Shariah ETF
18.72%18.30%16.70%30.13%-17.56%28.64%21.49%

Correlation

The correlation between ACGR and HLAL is 0.86, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.86

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.89

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.92

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 22, 2020

0.78

The correlation between ACGR and HLAL shifts across timeframes, from 0.78 (all time) to 0.92 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.


Return for Risk

ACGR vs. HLAL — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

ACGR
ACGR Risk / Return Rank: 4343
Overall Rank
ACGR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5050
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ACGR Sortino Ratio Rank: 4848
Sortino Ratio Rank
ACGR Omega Ratio Rank: 4646
Omega Ratio Rank
ACGR Calmar Ratio Rank: 3434
Calmar Ratio Rank
ACGR Martin Ratio Rank: 3737
Martin Ratio Rank

HLAL
HLAL Risk / Return Rank: 8888
Overall Rank
HLAL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9191
Sharpe Ratio Rank
HLAL Sortino Ratio Rank: 9292
Sortino Ratio Rank
HLAL Omega Ratio Rank: 9090
Omega Ratio Rank
HLAL Calmar Ratio Rank: 8181
Calmar Ratio Rank
HLAL Martin Ratio Rank: 8888
Martin Ratio Rank
The rank (0–100) shows how this investment's returns compare to the risk taken. Higher = better. Based on the past 12 months of data, combining Sharpe, Sortino, and other metrics used by quantitative funds and institutional investors.

ACGR vs. HLAL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for American Century Large Cap Growth ETF (ACGR) and Wahed FTSE USA Shariah ETF (HLAL). Risk-adjusted metrics are performance indicators that assess an investment's returns in relation to its risk, enabling a more accurate comparison of different investment options.


ACGRHLALDifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

1.74

3.33

-1.59

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

2.37

4.62

-2.25

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

1.30

1.59

-0.29

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

1.71

4.30

-2.58

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

5.83

19.85

-14.02

ACGR vs. HLAL - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ACGR Sharpe Ratio is 1.74, which is lower than the HLAL Sharpe Ratio of 3.33. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ACGR and HLAL, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


ACGRHLALDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.74

3.33

-1.59

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.72

0.91

-0.19

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.71

0.89

-0.19

Drawdowns

ACGR vs. HLAL - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ACGR drawdown since its inception was -34.54%, roughly equal to the maximum HLAL drawdown of -33.57%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ACGR and HLAL.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


ACGRHLALDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-34.54%

-33.57%

-0.97%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-15.84%

-10.20%

-5.64%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-24.58%

-21.67%

-2.91%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-34.54%

-23.18%

-11.36%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.45%

-0.07%

-0.38%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-8.50%

-5.00%

-3.50%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

4.66%

2.20%

+2.46%

Volatility

ACGR vs. HLAL - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for American Century Large Cap Growth ETF (ACGR) is 3.35%, while Wahed FTSE USA Shariah ETF (HLAL) has a volatility of 3.70%. This indicates that ACGR experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than HLAL based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


ACGRHLALDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.35%

3.70%

-0.35%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

11.88%

9.95%

+1.93%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

15.43%

13.17%

+2.26%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

21.50%

17.60%

+3.90%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

21.42%

20.21%

+1.21%

ACGR vs. HLAL - Expense Ratio Comparison

ACGR has a 0.39% expense ratio, which is lower than HLAL's 0.50% expense ratio.


Dividends

ACGR vs. HLAL - Dividend Comparison

ACGR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.09%, less than HLAL's 0.44% yield.


PositionTTM2025202420232022202120202019
ACGR
American Century Large Cap Growth ETF
0.09%0.11%0.23%0.37%0.48%0.58%1.44%0.00%
HLAL
Wahed FTSE USA Shariah ETF
0.44%0.53%0.58%0.72%1.15%0.78%0.97%0.72%

Frequently Asked Questions


ACGR and HLAL have a correlation of 0.86, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

HLAL has higher volatility (3.70%) compared to ACGR (3.35%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ACGR dropped -34.54% vs HLAL's -33.57%.

On 5-year performance, HLAL leads with 15.86% vs 15.34% for ACGR. On fees, ACGR is cheaper at 0.39% per year. On volatility, ACGR has been the lower-risk option at 3.35%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 5-year period, HLAL has performed better with a 15.86% return vs 15.34%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

ACGR is cheaper with a 0.39% expense ratio, compared with 0.50% for HLAL.

HLAL has the higher dividend yield at 0.44%, compared with 0.09% for ACGR.

ACGR tracks Russell 1000 Growth Index, while HLAL tracks FTSE Shariah USA Index. They also come from different issuers: American Century and Wahed. Their fees differ too: 0.39% for ACGR and 0.50% for HLAL.

HLAL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.33 vs 1.74), meaning it's delivered slightly more return per unit of risk over the trailing 12 months. However, this ranking shifts over time - use the Risk/Return Score above for a more comprehensive view that combines Sharpe, Sortino, and other measures used by quantitative funds.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for ACGR and HLAL

Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.

Open Portfolio Optimizer