CLCG vs. GRW

Last updated Jul 17, 2026

CLCG (Crossmark Large Cap Growth ETF) and GRW (TCW Durable Growth ETF) are both Large Cap Growth Equities funds. Both are actively managed. A 0.77 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. CLCG charges 0.50%/yr vs 0.75%/yr for GRW.

Performance

CLCG vs. GRW - Performance Comparison

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

Returns By Period

CLCG

• 1D: -1.57%
• 1M: -1.49%
• 6M: 6.74%
• YTD: 5.84%
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

GRW

• 1D: -0.86%
• 1M: -1.00%
• 6M: —
• YTD: —
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

CLCG vs. GRW - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)
CLCG Crossmark Large Cap Growth ETF	-1.80%
GRW TCW Durable Growth ETF	2.09%

Correlation

The correlation between CLCG and GRW is 0.77, 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	0.77

Return for Risk

CLCG vs. GRW - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Crossmark Large Cap Growth ETF (CLCG) 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

CLCG vs. GRW - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CLCG drawdown since its inception was -16.32%, which is greater than GRW's maximum drawdown of -3.83%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CLCG and GRW.

Drawdown Indicators

	CLCG	GRW	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-16.32%	-3.83%	-12.49%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-4.09%	-2.69%	-1.40%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.83%	-1.18%	-2.65%

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	CLCG	GRW	Difference
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	17.71%	16.46%	+1.25%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	17.71%	16.46%	+1.25%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	17.71%	16.46%	+1.25%

CLCG vs. GRW - Expense Ratio Comparison

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

Dividends

CLCG vs. GRW - Dividend Comparison

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

Position	TTM	2025
CLCG Crossmark Large Cap Growth ETF	0.06%	0.07%
GRW TCW Durable Growth ETF	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CLCG and GRW in my portfolio?

CLCG and GRW have a correlation of 0.77, 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 GRW?

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 GRW?

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

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

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

What is the main difference between CLCG and GRW?

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