PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
ACSI vs. ILCG
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

ACSI vs. ILCG - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in American Customer Satisfaction ETF (ACSI) and iShares Morningstar Growth ETF (ILCG). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ACSI achieves a 10.79% return, which is significantly lower than ILCG's 14.41% return.


ACSI

1D
1.04%
1M
6.00%
YTD
10.79%
6M
11.03%
1Y
20.22%
3Y*
18.90%
5Y*
9.35%
10Y*

ILCG

1D
-0.06%
1M
6.73%
YTD
14.41%
6M
14.04%
1Y
28.93%
3Y*
26.58%
5Y*
14.94%
10Y*
18.11%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

ACSI vs. ILCG - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
ACSI
American Customer Satisfaction ETF
10.79%10.70%22.51%21.06%-20.93%23.33%22.93%24.88%-4.97%15.77%
ILCG
iShares Morningstar Growth ETF
14.41%16.71%32.82%40.41%-31.75%24.33%38.56%33.22%2.06%30.57%

Correlation

The correlation between ACSI and ILCG is 0.63, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.


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

0.63

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

0.74

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

0.82

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 2, 2016

0.77

The correlation between ACSI and ILCG shifts across timeframes, from 0.63 (1 year) to 0.82 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

ACSI vs. ILCG - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
ACSI
ILCG

Consumer Cyclical

24.2%
10.6%

Communication Services

15.4%
14.5%

Technology

12.5%
49.8%

Consumer Defensive

12.4%
1.6%

Financial Services

9.6%
6.0%

Healthcare

8.5%
5.3%

Industrials

7.3%
8.3%

Utilities

3.9%
0.8%

Energy

3.4%
0.5%

Basic Materials

-

1.1%

Real Estate

-

1.4%

Consumer Cyclical

ACSI
24.2%
ILCG
10.6%

Communication Services

ACSI
15.4%
ILCG
14.5%

Technology

ACSI
12.5%
ILCG
49.8%

Consumer Defensive

ACSI
12.4%
ILCG
1.6%

Financial Services

ACSI
9.6%
ILCG
6.0%

Healthcare

ACSI
8.5%
ILCG
5.3%

Industrials

ACSI
7.3%
ILCG
8.3%

Utilities

ACSI
3.9%
ILCG
0.8%

Energy

ACSI
3.4%
ILCG
0.5%

Basic Materials

ACSI

-

ILCG
1.1%

Real Estate

ACSI

-

ILCG
1.4%

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. ILCG — Risk / Return Rank

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

ACSI
ACSI Risk / Return Rank: 5353
Overall Rank
ACSI Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5252
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ACSI Sortino Ratio Rank: 5252
Sortino Ratio Rank
ACSI Omega Ratio Rank: 5050
Omega Ratio Rank
ACSI Calmar Ratio Rank: 5454
Calmar Ratio Rank
ACSI Martin Ratio Rank: 5858
Martin Ratio Rank

ILCG
ILCG Risk / Return Rank: 4747
Overall Rank
ILCG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5353
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ILCG Sortino Ratio Rank: 5050
Sortino Ratio Rank
ILCG Omega Ratio Rank: 5151
Omega Ratio Rank
ILCG Calmar Ratio Rank: 3838
Calmar Ratio Rank
ILCG Martin Ratio Rank: 4242
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.

ACSI vs. ILCG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for American Customer Satisfaction ETF (ACSI) and iShares Morningstar Growth ETF (ILCG). 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.


ACSIILCGDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.03

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.07

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.31

1.31

0.00

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.62

1.86

+0.76

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

10.22

6.54

+3.67

ACSI vs. ILCG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ACSI Sharpe Ratio is 1.75, which is comparable to the ILCG Sharpe Ratio of 1.78. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ACSI and ILCG, 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


ACSIILCGDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.75

1.78

-0.03

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.56

0.68

-0.12

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.84

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.76

0.59

+0.17

Drawdowns

ACSI vs. ILCG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ACSI drawdown since its inception was -34.49%, smaller than the maximum ILCG drawdown of -52.98%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ACSI and ILCG.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


ACSIILCGDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-34.49%

-52.98%

+18.49%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-7.76%

-15.65%

+7.89%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-15.27%

-23.10%

+7.83%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-24.86%

-35.38%

+10.52%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-35.38%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.37%

-1.08%

-0.29%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-5.39%

-8.22%

+2.83%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.99%

4.43%

-2.44%

Volatility

ACSI vs. ILCG - Volatility Comparison

American Customer Satisfaction ETF (ACSI) and iShares Morningstar Growth ETF (ILCG) have volatilities of 4.22% and 4.39%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


ACSIILCGDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.22%

4.39%

-0.17%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

8.93%

12.81%

-3.88%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

11.60%

16.30%

-4.70%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

16.67%

21.99%

-5.32%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

17.43%

21.53%

-4.10%

ACSI vs. ILCG - Expense Ratio Comparison

ACSI has a 0.66% expense ratio, which is higher than ILCG's 0.04% expense ratio.


Dividends

ACSI vs. ILCG - Dividend Comparison

ACSI's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.82%, more than ILCG's 0.40% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
ACSI
American Customer Satisfaction ETF
0.82%0.91%0.69%1.01%0.81%0.31%0.82%1.64%1.59%1.20%0.18%0.00%
ILCG
iShares Morningstar Growth ETF
0.40%0.47%0.50%0.69%0.75%0.34%0.28%0.54%0.81%0.89%0.95%0.99%

Frequently Asked Questions


ACSI and ILCG have a correlation of 0.63, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

ILCG has higher volatility (4.39%) compared to ACSI (4.22%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ACSI dropped -34.49% vs ILCG's -52.98%.

On 5-year performance, ILCG leads with 14.94% vs 9.35% for ACSI. On fees, ILCG is cheaper at 0.04% per year. On volatility, ACSI has been the lower-risk option at 4.22%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 5-year period, ILCG has performed better with a 14.94% return vs 9.35%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

ILCG is cheaper with a 0.04% expense ratio, compared with 0.66% for ACSI.

ACSI has the higher dividend yield at 0.82%, compared with 0.40% for ILCG.

ACSI tracks American Customer Satisfaction Investable Index, while ILCG tracks Morningstar US Large-Mid Cap Broad Growth Index Gross. They also come from different issuers: Exponential ETFs and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.66% for ACSI and 0.04% for ILCG.

ILCG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.78 vs 1.75), 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 ACSI and ILCG

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