AGRW vs. GQGU

Last updated Jul 14, 2026

AGRW (Allspring LT Large Growth ETF) and GQGU (GQG US Equity ETF) are both Large Cap Growth Equities funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, AGRW returned 12.48% vs 4.92% for GQGU. At a correlation of -0.30, they often move in opposite directions. AGRW charges 0.35%/yr vs 0.49%/yr for GQGU.

Performance

AGRW vs. GQGU - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Allspring LT Large Growth ETF (AGRW) and GQG US Equity ETF (GQGU). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both investments are quite close, with AGRW having a 5.86% return and GQGU slightly higher at 6.11%.

AGRW

• 1D: -1.18%
• 1M: 2.04%
• 6M: 5.05%
• YTD: 5.86%
• 1Y: 12.48%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

GQGU

• 1D: 0.29%
• 1M: -0.27%
• 6M: 6.11%
• YTD: 6.11%
• 1Y: 4.92%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

AGRW vs. GQGU - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
AGRW Allspring LT Large Growth ETF	5.86%	6.26%
GQGU GQG US Equity ETF	6.11%	-1.12%

Correlation

The correlation between AGRW and GQGU is -0.30, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.

	Correlation
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 14, 2025	-0.30

Return for Risk

AGRW vs. GQGU — Risk / Return Rank

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

AGRW

AGRW Risk / Return Rank: 24
AGRW Sharpe Ratio Rank: 25
AGRW Sortino Ratio Rank: 24
AGRW Omega Ratio Rank: 24
AGRW Calmar Ratio Rank: 21
AGRW Martin Ratio Rank: 23

GQGU

Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.

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.

AGRW vs. GQGU - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Allspring LT Large Growth ETF (AGRW) and GQG US Equity ETF (GQGU). 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.

	AGRW	GQGU	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.75	—	—
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.11	—	—
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.14	—	—
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.76	—	—
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	2.36	—	—

Drawdowns

AGRW vs. GQGU - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum AGRW drawdown since its inception was -16.46%, which is greater than GQGU's maximum drawdown of -8.41%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for AGRW and GQGU.

Drawdown Indicators

	AGRW	GQGU	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-16.46%	-8.41%	-8.05%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-16.46%	-8.41%	-8.05%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-4.97%	-5.09%	+0.12%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.48%	-2.88%	-0.60%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	5.29%	—	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	AGRW	GQGU	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.39%	—	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	13.54%	—	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	16.73%	10.74%	+5.99%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	21.85%	10.74%	+11.11%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	21.85%	10.74%	+11.11%

AGRW vs. GQGU - Expense Ratio Comparison

AGRW has a 0.35% expense ratio, which is lower than GQGU's 0.49% expense ratio.

Dividends

AGRW vs. GQGU - Dividend Comparison

AGRW's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.12%, less than GQGU's 0.96% yield.

Position	TTM	2025
AGRW Allspring LT Large Growth ETF	0.12%	0.13%
GQGU GQG US Equity ETF	0.96%	1.02%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both AGRW and GQGU in my portfolio?

AGRW and GQGU have a correlation of -0.30, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, AGRW or GQGU?

On 1-year performance, AGRW leads with 12.48% vs 4.92% for GQGU. On fees, AGRW is cheaper at 0.35% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, AGRW or GQGU?

Over the 1-year period, AGRW has performed better with a 12.48% return vs 4.92%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, AGRW or GQGU?

AGRW is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.49% for GQGU.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, AGRW or GQGU?

GQGU has the higher dividend yield at 0.96%, compared with 0.12% for AGRW.

What is the main difference between AGRW and GQGU?

They also come from different issuers: Allspring and GQG Partners. Their fees differ too: 0.35% for AGRW and 0.49% for GQGU.