CLCG vs. FITZ

Last updated Aug 1, 2026

CLCG (Crossmark Large Cap Growth ETF) and FITZ (Fitz-Gerald Must Have Portfolio ETF) are both Large Cap Growth Equities funds. Both are actively managed. Their 0.79 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. CLCG charges 0.50%/yr vs 0.75%/yr for FITZ.

Performance

CLCG vs. FITZ - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Crossmark Large Cap Growth ETF (CLCG) and Fitz-Gerald Must Have Portfolio ETF (FITZ). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

CLCG

• 1D: 0.73%
• 1M: -1.51%
• 6M: 5.65%
• YTD: 3.81%
• 1Y: 13.10%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 12.28%

FITZ

• 1D: 0.60%
• 1M: -0.74%
• 6M: —
• YTD: —
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: —

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
CLCG Crossmark Large Cap Growth ETF	$90.16K	$60.89K	$73.13K
FITZ Fitz-Gerald Must Have Portfolio ETF	$718.51K	$811.16K	$3.71M

CLCG vs. FITZ - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)
CLCG Crossmark Large Cap Growth ETF	-3.68%
FITZ Fitz-Gerald Must Have Portfolio ETF	-2.88%

Correlation

The correlation between CLCG and FITZ is 0.79, which is moderate. They have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently, sharing some price drivers without tracking each other closely.

	Correlation
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 28, 2026	0.79

Return for Risk

CLCG vs. FITZ — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

CLCG

CLCG Risk / Return Rank: 26
CLCG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 27
CLCG Sortino Ratio Rank: 26
CLCG Omega Ratio Rank: 25
CLCG Calmar Ratio Rank: 24
CLCG Martin Ratio Rank: 26

FITZ

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

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

CLCG vs. FITZ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Crossmark Large Cap Growth ETF (CLCG) and Fitz-Gerald Must Have Portfolio ETF (FITZ). 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.

	CLCG	FITZ	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.63	—	—
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.98	—	—
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.12	—	—
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.69	—	—
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	2.12	—	—

Drawdowns

CLCG vs. FITZ - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CLCG drawdown since its inception was -16.32%, which is greater than FITZ's maximum drawdown of -7.37%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CLCG and FITZ.

Drawdown Indicators

	CLCG	FITZ	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-16.32%	-7.37%	-8.95%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-16.32%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-5.92%	-4.25%	-1.67%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.92%	-4.03%	+0.11%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	5.34%	—	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	CLCG	FITZ	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.58%	—	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	14.18%	—	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	17.97%	14.85%	+3.12%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	17.80%	14.85%	+2.95%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	17.80%	14.85%	+2.95%

CLCG vs. FITZ - Expense Ratio Comparison

CLCG has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is lower than FITZ's 0.75% expense ratio.

Dividends

CLCG vs. FITZ - Dividend Comparison

CLCG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.06%, while FITZ has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025
CLCG Crossmark Large Cap Growth ETF	0.06%	0.07%
FITZ Fitz-Gerald Must Have Portfolio ETF	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CLCG and FITZ in my portfolio?

CLCG and FITZ have a correlation of 0.79, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, CLCG or FITZ?

On fees, CLCG is cheaper at 0.50% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, CLCG or FITZ?

CLCG is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for FITZ.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, CLCG or FITZ?

CLCG has the higher dividend yield at 0.06%, compared with 0.00% for FITZ.

What is the main difference between CLCG and FITZ?

They also come from different issuers: Crossmark and Nicholas. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for CLCG and 0.75% for FITZ.