ACGR vs. HLAL
ACGR (American Century Large Cap Growth ETF) and HLAL (Wahed FTSE USA Shariah ETF) are both Large Cap Growth Equities funds - ACGR tracks the Russell 1000 Growth Index while HLAL tracks the FTSE Shariah USA Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, ACGR returned 15.34%/yr vs 15.86%/yr for HLAL. A 0.78 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. ACGR charges 0.39%/yr vs 0.50%/yr for HLAL.
Performance
ACGR vs. HLAL - Performance Comparison
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*
- —
ACGR vs. HLAL - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
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
ACGR
HLAL
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.
| ACGR | HLAL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | 1.74 | 3.33 | -1.59 |
Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | 2.37 | 4.62 | -2.25 |
Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.30 | 1.59 | -0.29 |
Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.71 | 4.30 | -2.58 |
Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 5.83 | 19.85 | -14.02 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| ACGR | HLAL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
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
| ACGR | HLAL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest 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 DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.45% | -0.07% | -0.38% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -8.50% | -5.00% | -3.50% |
Ulcer IndexDepth 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
| ACGR | HLAL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
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.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
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.
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