ACGR vs. QWLD
ACGR (American Century Large Cap Growth ETF) and QWLD (SPDR MSCI World StrategicFactors ETF) are both Large Cap Growth Equities funds - ACGR tracks the Russell 1000 Growth Index while QWLD tracks the MSCI World Factor Mix A-Series (USD). Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, ACGR returned 10.63%/yr vs 10.03%/yr for QWLD. Their 0.70 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. ACGR charges 0.39%/yr vs 0.30%/yr for QWLD.
Performance
ACGR vs. QWLD - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, ACGR achieves a 2.62% return, which is significantly lower than QWLD's 9.39% return.
ACGR
- 1D
- 1.97%
- 1M
- -0.45%
- 6M
- 4.44%
- YTD
- 2.62%
- 1Y
- 11.79%
- 3Y*
- 16.94%
- 5Y*
- 10.63%
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- 13.68%
QWLD
- 1D
- 0.22%
- 1M
- 1.63%
- 6M
- 6.46%
- YTD
- 9.39%
- 1Y
- 19.11%
- 3Y*
- 15.49%
- 5Y*
- 10.03%
- 10Y*
- 11.57%
- ALL TIME*
- 10.49%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $29.10K | $15.91K | $23.50K | |
| $231.12K | $297.84K | $1.04M |
ACGR vs. QWLD - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ACGR American Century Large Cap Growth ETF | 2.62% | 14.50% | 26.66% | 43.24% | -30.13% | 39.24% | 11.27% |
QWLD SPDR MSCI World StrategicFactors ETF | 9.39% | 17.93% | 14.44% | 19.59% | -13.30% | 21.57% | 7.32% |
Correlation
The correlation between ACGR and QWLD is 0.66, which is moderate. They have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently, sharing some price drivers without tracking each other closely.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most. | 0.66 |
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history. | 0.73 |
Correlation (5Y) Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period. | 0.81 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 21, 2020 | 0.70 |
The correlation between ACGR and QWLD shifts across timeframes, from 0.66 (1 year) to 0.81 (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. QWLD — Risk / Return Rank
ACGR
QWLD
ACGR vs. QWLD - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for American Century Large Cap Growth ETF (ACGR) and SPDR MSCI World StrategicFactors ETF (QWLD). 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.
Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.
| ACGR | QWLD | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -1.34 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -1.83 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.11 | 1.34 | -0.24 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.64 | 2.44 | -1.81 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 1.92 | 10.67 | -8.75 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
ACGR vs. QWLD - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum ACGR drawdown since its inception was -34.54%, which is greater than QWLD's maximum drawdown of -31.89%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ACGR and QWLD.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| ACGR | QWLD | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -34.54% | -31.89% | -2.65% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -15.84% | -7.66% | -8.18% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -24.58% | -12.40% | -12.18% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -34.54% | -22.84% | -11.70% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -31.89% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -6.04% | 0.00% | -6.04% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -8.43% | -3.66% | -4.77% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 5.24% | 1.75% | +3.49% |
Volatility
ACGR vs. QWLD - Volatility Comparison
American Century Large Cap Growth ETF (ACGR) has a higher volatility of 5.92% compared to SPDR MSCI World StrategicFactors ETF (QWLD) at 2.30%. This indicates that ACGR's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than QWLD based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| ACGR | QWLD | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 5.92% | 2.30% | +3.62% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 13.60% | 7.73% | +5.87% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 17.13% | 9.71% | +7.42% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 21.55% | 13.51% | +8.04% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 21.41% | 15.12% | +6.29% |
ACGR vs. QWLD - Expense Ratio Comparison
ACGR has a 0.39% expense ratio, which is higher than QWLD's 0.30% expense ratio.
Dividends
ACGR vs. QWLD - Dividend Comparison
ACGR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.12%, less than QWLD's 1.79% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ACGR American Century Large Cap Growth ETF | 0.12% | 0.11% | 0.23% | 0.37% | 0.48% | 0.58% | 1.44% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
QWLD SPDR MSCI World StrategicFactors ETF | 1.79% | 1.85% | 1.74% | 1.78% | 2.02% | 1.77% | 1.77% | 2.13% | 2.33% | 2.73% | 2.22% | 3.42% |
Frequently Asked Questions
ACGR and QWLD have a correlation of 0.66, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
ACGR has higher volatility (5.92%) compared to QWLD (2.30%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ACGR dropped -34.54% vs QWLD's -31.89%.
On 5-year performance, ACGR leads with 10.63% vs 10.03% for QWLD. On fees, QWLD is cheaper at 0.30% per year. On volatility, QWLD has been the lower-risk option at 2.30%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 5-year period, ACGR has performed better with a 10.63% return vs 10.03%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
QWLD is cheaper with a 0.30% expense ratio, compared with 0.39% for ACGR.
QWLD has the higher dividend yield at 1.79%, compared with 0.12% for ACGR.
ACGR tracks Russell 1000 Growth Index, while QWLD tracks MSCI World Factor Mix A-Series (USD). They also come from different issuers: American Century and State Street. Their fees differ too: 0.39% for ACGR and 0.30% for QWLD.
QWLD currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.93 vs 0.59), 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 QWLD
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