CARK vs. ILCG

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

CARK (Castleark Large Growth ETF) and ILCG (iShares Morningstar Growth ETF) are both Large Cap Growth Equities funds. CARK is actively managed, while ILCG is passively managed. Over the past year, CARK returned 16.47% vs 22.02% for ILCG. With a 0.96 correlation, they move nearly in lockstep. CARK charges 0.54%/yr vs 0.04%/yr for ILCG.

Performance

CARK vs. ILCG - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Castleark Large Growth ETF (CARK) and iShares Morningstar Growth ETF (ILCG). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CARK achieves a 3.62% return, which is significantly lower than ILCG's 9.21% return.

CARK

• 1D: -2.21%
• 1M: -2.47%
• YTD: 3.62%
• 6M: 2.61%
• 1Y: 16.47%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

ILCG

• 1D: -2.86%
• 1M: -1.80%
• YTD: 9.21%
• 6M: 7.82%
• 1Y: 22.02%
• 3Y*: 23.80%
• 5Y*: 12.71%
• 10Y*: 18.10%

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

CARK vs. ILCG - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
CARK Castleark Large Growth ETF	3.62%	10.84%	26.49%	4.12%
ILCG iShares Morningstar Growth ETF	9.21%	16.71%	32.82%	4.87%

Correlation

The correlation between CARK and ILCG is 0.96 - these two move nearly in lockstep. At this level, holding both provides almost no diversification benefit. If you already own one, adding the other does little to reduce portfolio risk.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.96
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 7, 2023	0.96

The correlation between CARK and ILCG has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.96 to 0.96 - a consistent structural relationship.

CARK vs. ILCG - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	CARK	ILCG
Technology	56.3%	53.1%
Communication Services	14.5%	13.5%
Consumer Cyclical	8.6%	10.1%
Financial Services	8.2%	5.5%
Healthcare	7.6%	5.2%
Industrials	4.8%	7.7%
Basic Materials	-	1.0%
Consumer Defensive	-	1.4%
Energy	-	0.4%
Real Estate	-	1.3%
Utilities	-	0.7%

Return for Risk

CARK vs. ILCG — Risk / Return Rank

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

CARK

CARK Risk / Return Rank: 26
CARK Sharpe Ratio Rank: 27
CARK Sortino Ratio Rank: 26
CARK Omega Ratio Rank: 26
CARK Calmar Ratio Rank: 23
CARK Martin Ratio Rank: 26

ILCG

ILCG Risk / Return Rank: 34
ILCG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 36
ILCG Sortino Ratio Rank: 34
ILCG Omega Ratio Rank: 36
ILCG Calmar Ratio Rank: 30
ILCG Martin Ratio Rank: 34

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.

CARK vs. ILCG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Castleark Large Growth ETF (CARK) and iShares Morningstar Growth ETF (ILCG). 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.

	CARK	ILCG	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.92	1.25	-0.33
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.33	1.72	-0.39
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.17	1.23	-0.06
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.00	1.41	-0.41
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	3.31	4.86	-1.55

CARK vs. ILCG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CARK Sharpe Ratio is 0.92, which is comparable to the ILCG Sharpe Ratio of 1.25. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CARK and ILCG, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

CARK vs. ILCG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CARK drawdown since its inception was -25.22%, smaller than the maximum ILCG drawdown of -52.98%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CARK and ILCG.

Drawdown Indicators

	CARK	ILCG	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-25.22%	-52.98%	+27.76%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-16.50%	-15.65%	-0.85%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-23.10%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-35.38%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-35.38%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-5.86%	-5.58%	-0.28%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-4.44%	-8.21%	+3.77%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.99%	4.54%	+0.45%

Volatility

CARK vs. ILCG - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Castleark Large Growth ETF (CARK) is 6.75%, while iShares Morningstar Growth ETF (ILCG) has a volatility of 7.83%. This indicates that CARK experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than ILCG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	CARK	ILCG	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.75%	7.83%	-1.08%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	13.93%	14.51%	-0.58%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	17.92%	17.70%	+0.22%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	20.84%	22.22%	-1.38%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	20.84%	21.63%	-0.79%

CARK vs. ILCG - Expense Ratio Comparison

CARK has a 0.54% expense ratio, which is higher than ILCG's 0.04% expense ratio.

Dividends

CARK vs. ILCG - Dividend Comparison

CARK's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.01%, less than ILCG's 0.42% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
CARK Castleark Large Growth ETF	0.01%	0.01%	0.02%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
ILCG iShares Morningstar Growth ETF	0.42%	0.47%	0.50%	0.69%	0.75%	0.34%	0.28%	0.54%	0.81%	0.89%	0.95%	0.99%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CARK and ILCG in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.96, CARK and ILCG move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

Which is riskier, CARK or ILCG?

ILCG has higher volatility (7.83%) compared to CARK (6.75%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CARK dropped -25.22% vs ILCG's -52.98%.

Which ETF is better, CARK or ILCG?

On 1-year performance, ILCG leads with 22.02% vs 16.47% for CARK. On fees, ILCG is cheaper at 0.04% per year. On volatility, CARK has been the lower-risk option at 6.75%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, CARK or ILCG?

Over the 1-year period, ILCG has performed better with a 22.02% return vs 16.47%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, CARK or ILCG?

ILCG is cheaper with a 0.04% expense ratio, compared with 0.54% for CARK.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, CARK or ILCG?

ILCG has the higher dividend yield at 0.42%, compared with 0.01% for CARK.

What is the main difference between CARK and ILCG?

They also come from different issuers: CastleArk and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.54% for CARK and 0.04% for ILCG.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

ILCG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.25 vs 0.92), 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.