ACSI vs. GRW
ACSI (American Customer Satisfaction ETF) and GRW (TCW Durable Growth ETF) are both Large Cap Growth Equities funds. ACSI is passively managed, while GRW is actively managed. A 0.66 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. ACSI charges 0.66%/yr vs 0.75%/yr for GRW.
Performance
ACSI vs. GRW - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
ACSI
- 1D
- 0.61%
- 1M
- 2.03%
- YTD
- 10.57%
- 6M
- 10.67%
- 1Y
- 19.62%
- 3Y*
- 18.13%
- 5Y*
- 9.08%
- 10Y*
- —
GRW
- 1D
- -0.89%
- 1M
- —
- YTD
- —
- 6M
- —
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
ACSI vs. GRW - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | |
|---|---|
ACSI American Customer Satisfaction ETF | 1.32% |
GRW TCW Durable Growth ETF | 1.71% |
Correlation
The correlation between ACSI and GRW is 0.66, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 28, 2026 | 0.66 |
ACSI vs. GRW - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
ACSI
GRW
Consumer Cyclical
Communication Services
Technology
Consumer Defensive
-
Financial Services
Healthcare
Industrials
Utilities
-
Energy
-
Basic Materials
-
Real Estate
-
-
Consumer Cyclical
ACSI
GRW
Communication Services
ACSI
GRW
Technology
ACSI
GRW
Consumer Defensive
ACSI
GRW
-
Financial Services
ACSI
GRW
Healthcare
ACSI
GRW
Industrials
ACSI
GRW
Utilities
ACSI
GRW
-
Energy
ACSI
GRW
-
Basic Materials
ACSI
-
GRW
Real Estate
ACSI
-
GRW
-
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
ACSI vs. GRW — Risk / Return Rank
ACSI
GRW
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
ACSI vs. GRW - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for American Customer Satisfaction ETF (ACSI) and TCW Durable Growth ETF (GRW). 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.
| ACSI | GRW | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.30 | — | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.54 | — | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 9.78 | — | — |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
ACSI vs. GRW - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum ACSI drawdown since its inception was -34.49%, which is greater than GRW's maximum drawdown of -3.83%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ACSI and GRW.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| ACSI | GRW | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -34.49% | -3.83% | -30.66% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -7.76% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -15.27% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -24.86% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -1.57% | -2.25% | +0.68% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -5.37% | -0.99% | -4.38% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.01% | — | — |
Volatility
ACSI vs. GRW - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| ACSI | GRW | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 4.09% | — | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 9.13% | — | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 11.56% | 19.15% | -7.59% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 16.68% | 19.15% | -2.47% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 17.40% | 19.15% | -1.75% |
ACSI vs. GRW - Expense Ratio Comparison
ACSI has a 0.66% expense ratio, which is lower than GRW's 0.75% expense ratio.
Dividends
ACSI vs. GRW - Dividend Comparison
ACSI's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.83%, while GRW has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ACSI American Customer Satisfaction ETF | 0.83% | 0.91% | 0.69% | 1.01% | 0.81% | 0.31% | 0.82% | 1.64% | 1.59% | 1.20% | 0.18% |
GRW TCW Durable Growth ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
ACSI and GRW 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.
On fees, ACSI is cheaper at 0.66% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
ACSI is cheaper with a 0.66% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for GRW.
ACSI has the higher dividend yield at 0.83%, compared with 0.00% for GRW.
They also come from different issuers: Exponential ETFs and TCW. Their fees differ too: 0.66% for ACSI and 0.75% for GRW.
Find the right allocation for ACSI and GRW
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