PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
CAML vs. DARP
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

CAML vs. DARP - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Congress Large Cap Growth ETF (CAML) and Grizzle Growth ETF (DARP). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CAML achieves a 3.12% return, which is significantly lower than DARP's 26.29% return.


CAML

1D
0.15%
1M
-0.76%
YTD
3.12%
6M
1.68%
1Y
10.28%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*

DARP

1D
0.07%
1M
-1.69%
YTD
26.29%
6M
25.20%
1Y
64.67%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

CAML vs. DARP - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023
CAML
Congress Large Cap Growth ETF
3.12%12.43%23.24%9.57%
DARP
Grizzle Growth ETF
26.29%40.19%24.63%6.25%

Correlation

The correlation between CAML and DARP is 0.76, 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

0.76

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 28, 2023

0.80

The correlation between CAML and DARP has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.76 to 0.80 - a consistent structural relationship.

CAML vs. DARP - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
CAML
DARP

Technology

44.7%
49.5%

Industrials

11.8%
7.7%

Consumer Cyclical

10.0%
5.6%

Communication Services

9.6%
17.2%

Financial Services

8.7%

-

Healthcare

6.2%
1.4%

Utilities

3.4%
4.6%

Real Estate

2.4%

-

Consumer Defensive

2.4%

-

Energy

2.2%
8.2%

Basic Materials

2.0%
3.2%

Technology

CAML
44.7%
DARP
49.5%

Industrials

CAML
11.8%
DARP
7.7%

Consumer Cyclical

CAML
10.0%
DARP
5.6%

Communication Services

CAML
9.6%
DARP
17.2%

Financial Services

CAML
8.7%
DARP

-

Healthcare

CAML
6.2%
DARP
1.4%

Utilities

CAML
3.4%
DARP
4.6%

Real Estate

CAML
2.4%
DARP

-

Consumer Defensive

CAML
2.4%
DARP

-

Energy

CAML
2.2%
DARP
8.2%

Basic Materials

CAML
2.0%
DARP
3.2%

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

CAML vs. DARP — Risk / Return Rank

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

CAML
CAML Risk / Return Rank: 2020
Overall Rank
CAML Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2121
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CAML Sortino Ratio Rank: 2020
Sortino Ratio Rank
CAML Omega Ratio Rank: 1919
Omega Ratio Rank
CAML Calmar Ratio Rank: 1818
Calmar Ratio Rank
CAML Martin Ratio Rank: 2121
Martin Ratio Rank

DARP
DARP Risk / Return Rank: 8686
Overall Rank
DARP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8989
Sharpe Ratio Rank
DARP Sortino Ratio Rank: 7878
Sortino Ratio Rank
DARP Omega Ratio Rank: 7979
Omega Ratio Rank
DARP Calmar Ratio Rank: 9292
Calmar Ratio Rank
DARP Martin Ratio Rank: 9191
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.

CAML vs. DARP - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Congress Large Cap Growth ETF (CAML) and Grizzle Growth ETF (DARP). 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.


CAMLDARPDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-1.95

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-2.02

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.13

1.41

-0.29

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

0.70

5.50

-4.81

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

2.27

19.42

-17.16

CAML vs. DARP - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CAML Sharpe Ratio is 0.68, which is lower than the DARP Sharpe Ratio of 2.63. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CAML and DARP, 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...

Drawdowns

CAML vs. DARP - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CAML drawdown since its inception was -21.06%, smaller than the maximum DARP drawdown of -30.27%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CAML and DARP.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


CAMLDARPDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-21.06%

-30.27%

+9.21%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-14.86%

-11.82%

-3.04%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-3.39%

-5.53%

+2.14%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-3.07%

-4.64%

+1.57%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

4.55%

3.34%

+1.21%

Volatility

CAML vs. DARP - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Congress Large Cap Growth ETF (CAML) is 5.98%, while Grizzle Growth ETF (DARP) has a volatility of 10.70%. This indicates that CAML experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than DARP based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


CAMLDARPDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

5.98%

10.70%

-4.72%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

12.19%

19.06%

-6.87%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

15.38%

24.83%

-9.45%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

17.87%

26.47%

-8.60%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

17.87%

26.47%

-8.60%

CAML vs. DARP - Expense Ratio Comparison

CAML has a 0.65% expense ratio, which is lower than DARP's 0.75% expense ratio.


Dividends

CAML vs. DARP - Dividend Comparison

CAML has not paid dividends to shareholders, while DARP's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.34%.


PositionTTM202520242023
CAML
Congress Large Cap Growth ETF
0.00%0.00%0.06%0.15%
DARP
Grizzle Growth ETF
0.34%0.43%1.93%0.32%

Frequently Asked Questions


CAML and DARP have a correlation of 0.76, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

DARP has higher volatility (10.70%) compared to CAML (5.98%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CAML dropped -21.06% vs DARP's -30.27%.

On 1-year performance, DARP leads with 64.67% vs 10.28% for CAML. On fees, CAML is cheaper at 0.65% per year. On volatility, CAML has been the lower-risk option at 5.98%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, DARP has performed better with a 64.67% return vs 10.28%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

CAML is cheaper with a 0.65% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for DARP.

DARP has the higher dividend yield at 0.34%, compared with 0.00% for CAML.

They also come from different issuers: Congress and Grizzle. Their fees differ too: 0.65% for CAML and 0.75% for DARP.

DARP currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.63 vs 0.68), 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 CAML and DARP

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