ACSI vs. IWFG
ACSI (American Customer Satisfaction ETF) and IWFG (NYLI Winslow Focused Large Cap Growth ETF) are both Large Cap Growth Equities funds. ACSI is passively managed, while IWFG is actively managed. Over the past 3 years, ACSI returned 18.51%/yr vs 23.02%/yr for IWFG. A 0.76 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. ACSI charges 0.66%/yr vs 0.46%/yr for IWFG.
Performance
ACSI vs. IWFG - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, ACSI achieves a 9.66% return, which is significantly higher than IWFG's 2.08% return.
ACSI
- 1D
- -0.92%
- 1M
- 5.55%
- YTD
- 9.66%
- 6M
- 9.77%
- 1Y
- 18.71%
- 3Y*
- 18.51%
- 5Y*
- 9.12%
- 10Y*
- —
IWFG
- 1D
- -1.30%
- 1M
- 4.41%
- YTD
- 2.08%
- 6M
- 1.13%
- 1Y
- 11.87%
- 3Y*
- 23.02%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
ACSI vs. IWFG - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ACSI American Customer Satisfaction ETF | 9.66% | 10.70% | 22.51% | 21.06% | -0.76% |
IWFG NYLI Winslow Focused Large Cap Growth ETF | 2.08% | 14.33% | 37.56% | 38.40% | 3.75% |
Correlation
The correlation between ACSI and IWFG is 0.60, 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 | 0.60 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.70 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 24, 2022 | 0.76 |
The correlation between ACSI and IWFG shifts across timeframes, from 0.60 (1 year) to 0.76 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
ACSI vs. IWFG - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
ACSI
IWFG
Consumer Cyclical
Communication Services
Technology
Consumer Defensive
-
Financial Services
Healthcare
Industrials
Utilities
Energy
-
Basic Materials
-
-
Real Estate
-
-
Consumer Cyclical
ACSI
IWFG
Communication Services
ACSI
IWFG
Technology
ACSI
IWFG
Consumer Defensive
ACSI
IWFG
-
Financial Services
ACSI
IWFG
Healthcare
ACSI
IWFG
Industrials
ACSI
IWFG
Utilities
ACSI
IWFG
Energy
ACSI
IWFG
-
Basic Materials
ACSI
-
IWFG
-
Real Estate
ACSI
-
IWFG
-
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. IWFG — Risk / Return Rank
ACSI
IWFG
ACSI vs. IWFG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for American Customer Satisfaction ETF (ACSI) and NYLI Winslow Focused Large Cap Growth ETF (IWFG). 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.
| ACSI | IWFG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.90 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +1.24 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.29 | 1.13 | +0.15 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.42 | 0.59 | +1.83 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 9.45 | 1.73 | +7.73 |
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
| ACSI | IWFG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.63 | 0.72 | +0.90 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.55 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.75 | 1.16 | -0.41 |
Drawdowns
ACSI vs. IWFG - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum ACSI drawdown since its inception was -34.49%, which is greater than IWFG's maximum drawdown of -21.97%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ACSI and IWFG.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| ACSI | IWFG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -34.49% | -21.97% | -12.52% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -7.76% | -20.20% | +12.44% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -15.27% | -21.97% | +6.70% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -24.86% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -2.38% | -2.79% | +0.41% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -5.39% | -4.13% | -1.26% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.98% | 6.89% | -4.91% |
Volatility
ACSI vs. IWFG - Volatility Comparison
American Customer Satisfaction ETF (ACSI) has a higher volatility of 4.16% compared to NYLI Winslow Focused Large Cap Growth ETF (IWFG) at 3.85%. This indicates that ACSI's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than IWFG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| ACSI | IWFG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 4.16% | 3.85% | +0.31% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 8.88% | 12.59% | -3.71% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 11.56% | 16.50% | -4.94% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 16.66% | 20.48% | -3.82% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 17.43% | 20.48% | -3.05% |
ACSI vs. IWFG - Expense Ratio Comparison
ACSI has a 0.66% expense ratio, which is higher than IWFG's 0.46% expense ratio.
Dividends
ACSI vs. IWFG - Dividend Comparison
ACSI's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.83%, while IWFG 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% |
IWFG NYLI Winslow Focused Large Cap Growth ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% | 5.44% | 1.01% | 0.05% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
ACSI and IWFG have a correlation of 0.60, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
ACSI has higher volatility (4.16%) compared to IWFG (3.85%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ACSI dropped -34.49% vs IWFG's -21.97%.
On 3-year performance, IWFG leads with 23.02% vs 18.51% for ACSI. On fees, IWFG is cheaper at 0.46% per year. On volatility, IWFG has been the lower-risk option at 3.85%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 3-year period, IWFG has performed better with a 23.02% return vs 18.51%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
IWFG is cheaper with a 0.46% expense ratio, compared with 0.66% for ACSI.
ACSI has the higher dividend yield at 0.83%, compared with 0.00% for IWFG.
They also come from different issuers: Exponential ETFs and New York Life. Their fees differ too: 0.66% for ACSI and 0.46% for IWFG.
ACSI currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.63 vs 0.72), 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 ACSI and IWFG
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