ARWG vs. GRW

Last updated Jun 25, 2026

ARWG (Archer Growth ETF) and GRW (TCW Durable Growth ETF) are both Large Cap Growth Equities funds. Both are actively managed. A 0.66 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. ARWG charges 0.85%/yr vs 0.75%/yr for GRW.

Performance

ARWG vs. GRW - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Archer Growth ETF (ARWG) and TCW Durable Growth ETF (GRW). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

ARWG

• 1D: 0.20%
• 1M: 4.19%
• YTD: 5.39%
• 6M: —
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

GRW

• 1D: 0.42%
• 1M: —
• YTD: —
• 6M: —
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

ARWG vs. GRW - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)
ARWG Archer Growth ETF	3.37%
GRW TCW Durable Growth ETF	2.13%

Correlation

The correlation between ARWG 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

Return for Risk

ARWG vs. GRW - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Archer Growth ETF (ARWG) 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.

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

Drawdowns

ARWG vs. GRW - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ARWG drawdown since its inception was -12.79%, which is greater than GRW's maximum drawdown of -3.83%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ARWG and GRW.

Drawdown Indicators

	ARWG	GRW	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-12.79%	-3.83%	-8.96%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.54%	-1.84%	-0.70%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.34%	-1.04%	-2.30%

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	ARWG	GRW	Difference
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	22.95%	18.65%	+4.30%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	22.95%	18.65%	+4.30%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	22.95%	18.65%	+4.30%

ARWG vs. GRW - Expense Ratio Comparison

ARWG has a 0.85% expense ratio, which is higher than GRW's 0.75% expense ratio.

Dividends

ARWG vs. GRW - Dividend Comparison

ARWG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.13%, while GRW has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM
ARWG Archer Growth ETF	0.13%
GRW TCW Durable Growth ETF	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both ARWG and GRW in my portfolio?

ARWG 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.

Which ETF is better, ARWG or GRW?

On fees, GRW is cheaper at 0.75% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, ARWG or GRW?

GRW is cheaper with a 0.75% expense ratio, compared with 0.85% for ARWG.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, ARWG or GRW?

ARWG has the higher dividend yield at 0.13%, compared with 0.00% for GRW.

What is the main difference between ARWG and GRW?

They also come from different issuers: Archer Funds and TCW. Their fees differ too: 0.85% for ARWG and 0.75% for GRW.