ARWG vs. VV
ARWG (Archer Growth ETF) and VV (Vanguard Large-Cap ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - ARWG is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund actively managed by Archer Funds, while VV is a Large Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the CRSP US Large Cap Index. ARWG is actively managed, while VV is passively managed. A 0.71 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. ARWG charges 0.85%/yr vs 0.04%/yr for VV.
Performance
ARWG vs. VV - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, ARWG achieves a 5.19% return, which is significantly lower than VV's 7.90% return.
ARWG
- 1D
- -2.73%
- 1M
- 3.98%
- YTD
- 5.19%
- 6M
- —
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
VV
- 1D
- -1.44%
- 1M
- -1.27%
- YTD
- 7.90%
- 6M
- 6.95%
- 1Y
- 23.37%
- 3Y*
- 21.00%
- 5Y*
- 12.65%
- 10Y*
- 15.62%
ARWG vs. VV - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
ARWG Archer Growth ETF | 5.19% | -0.95% |
VV Vanguard Large-Cap ETF | 7.90% | -0.85% |
Correlation
The correlation between ARWG and VV is 0.71, 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 Dec 30, 2025 | 0.71 |
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
ARWG vs. VV — Risk / Return Rank
ARWG
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
VV
ARWG vs. VV - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Archer Growth ETF (ARWG) and Vanguard Large-Cap ETF (VV). 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.
| ARWG | VV | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | — | 1.33 | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | — | 2.55 | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | — | 11.23 | — |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
ARWG vs. VV - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum ARWG drawdown since its inception was -12.79%, smaller than the maximum VV drawdown of -54.81%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ARWG and VV.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| ARWG | VV | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -12.79% | -54.81% | +42.02% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | — | -9.21% | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -18.97% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -25.66% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -34.28% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -2.73% | -3.21% | +0.48% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -3.35% | -6.83% | +3.48% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | — | 2.09% | — |
Volatility
ARWG vs. VV - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| ARWG | VV | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | — | 4.94% | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | — | 9.93% | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 23.04% | 12.66% | +10.38% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 23.04% | 17.33% | +5.71% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 23.04% | 18.21% | +4.83% |
ARWG vs. VV - Expense Ratio Comparison
ARWG has a 0.85% expense ratio, which is higher than VV's 0.04% expense ratio.
Dividends
ARWG vs. VV - Dividend Comparison
ARWG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.13%, less than VV's 1.00% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ARWG Archer Growth ETF | 0.13% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
VV Vanguard Large-Cap ETF | 1.00% | 1.08% | 1.24% | 1.41% | 1.66% | 1.19% | 1.46% | 1.81% | 2.09% | 1.75% | 1.98% | 1.96% |
Frequently Asked Questions
ARWG and VV have a correlation of 0.71, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, VV is cheaper at 0.04% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
VV is cheaper with a 0.04% expense ratio, compared with 0.85% for ARWG.
VV has the higher dividend yield at 1.00%, compared with 0.13% for ARWG.
ARWG is categorized as Large Cap Growth Equities, while VV is Large Cap Blend Equities. They also come from different issuers: Archer Funds and Vanguard. Their fees differ too: 0.85% for ARWG and 0.04% for VV.
Find the right allocation for ARWG and VV
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