PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
AGRW vs. NACP
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

AGRW vs. NACP - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Allspring LT Large Growth ETF (AGRW) and Impact Shares NAACP Minority Empowerment ETF (NACP). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, AGRW achieves a 8.77% return, which is significantly lower than NACP's 22.18% return.


AGRW

1D
-1.69%
1M
7.09%
YTD
8.77%
6M
8.21%
1Y
23.16%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*

NACP

1D
-0.13%
1M
9.92%
YTD
22.18%
6M
20.98%
1Y
43.81%
3Y*
27.18%
5Y*
15.98%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

AGRW vs. NACP - Yearly Performance Comparison


Correlation

The correlation between AGRW and NACP is 0.78, 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

0.78

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 28, 2025

0.81

The correlation between AGRW and NACP has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.78 to 0.81 - a consistent structural relationship.

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

AGRW vs. NACP — Risk / Return Rank

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

AGRW
AGRW Risk / Return Rank: 3737
Overall Rank
AGRW Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4343
Sharpe Ratio Rank
AGRW Sortino Ratio Rank: 4040
Sortino Ratio Rank
AGRW Omega Ratio Rank: 4141
Omega Ratio Rank
AGRW Calmar Ratio Rank: 3030
Calmar Ratio Rank
AGRW Martin Ratio Rank: 3333
Martin Ratio Rank

NACP
NACP Risk / Return Rank: 8888
Overall Rank
NACP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9090
Sharpe Ratio Rank
NACP Sortino Ratio Rank: 8989
Sortino Ratio Rank
NACP Omega Ratio Rank: 8686
Omega Ratio Rank
NACP Calmar Ratio Rank: 8484
Calmar Ratio Rank
NACP Martin Ratio Rank: 8989
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.

AGRW vs. NACP - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Allspring LT Large Growth ETF (AGRW) and Impact Shares NAACP Minority Empowerment ETF (NACP). 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.


AGRWNACPDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-1.68

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-2.15

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.26

1.54

-0.28

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.41

4.56

-3.15

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

4.73

20.04

-15.31

AGRW vs. NACP - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current AGRW Sharpe Ratio is 1.46, which is lower than the NACP Sharpe Ratio of 3.14. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of AGRW and NACP, 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


AGRWNACPDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.46

3.14

-1.68

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.92

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

1.28

0.93

+0.35

Drawdowns

AGRW vs. NACP - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum AGRW drawdown since its inception was -16.46%, smaller than the maximum NACP drawdown of -30.96%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for AGRW and NACP.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


AGRWNACPDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-16.46%

-30.96%

+14.50%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-16.46%

-9.65%

-6.81%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-19.66%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-27.89%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-2.36%

-0.13%

-2.23%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-3.28%

-5.75%

+2.47%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

4.91%

2.19%

+2.72%

Volatility

AGRW vs. NACP - Volatility Comparison

Allspring LT Large Growth ETF (AGRW) and Impact Shares NAACP Minority Empowerment ETF (NACP) have volatilities of 4.34% and 4.44%, 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


AGRWNACPDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.34%

4.44%

-0.10%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

12.44%

11.13%

+1.31%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

15.91%

14.02%

+1.89%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

21.99%

17.47%

+4.52%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

21.99%

18.70%

+3.29%

AGRW vs. NACP - Expense Ratio Comparison

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


Dividends

AGRW vs. NACP - Dividend Comparison

AGRW's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.12%, less than NACP's 0.55% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018
AGRW
Allspring LT Large Growth ETF
0.12%0.13%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
NACP
Impact Shares NAACP Minority Empowerment ETF
0.55%0.62%2.96%1.28%3.48%3.06%1.48%1.22%0.71%

Frequently Asked Questions


AGRW and NACP have a correlation of 0.78, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

NACP has higher volatility (4.44%) compared to AGRW (4.34%). In terms of maximum drawdown, AGRW dropped -16.46% vs NACP's -30.96%.

On 1-year performance, NACP leads with 43.81% vs 23.16% for AGRW. On fees, AGRW is cheaper at 0.35% per year. On volatility, AGRW has been the lower-risk option at 4.34%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, NACP has performed better with a 43.81% return vs 23.16%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

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

NACP has the higher dividend yield at 0.55%, compared with 0.12% for AGRW.

They also come from different issuers: Allspring and Impact Shares. Their fees differ too: 0.35% for AGRW and 0.49% for NACP.

NACP currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.14 vs 1.46), 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 AGRW and NACP

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