PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
CLCG vs. HYP
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

CLCG vs. HYP - Performance Comparison

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

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CLCG achieves a 8.90% return, which is significantly lower than HYP's 31.33% return.


CLCG

1D
-1.26%
1M
6.27%
YTD
8.90%
6M
8.68%
1Y
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*

HYP

1D
-2.27%
1M
8.44%
YTD
31.33%
6M
29.33%
1Y
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

CLCG vs. HYP - Yearly Performance Comparison


Correlation

The correlation between CLCG and HYP is 0.60, 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 Sep 24, 2025

0.60

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

CLCG vs. HYP - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Crossmark Large Cap Growth ETF (CLCG) and Golden Eagle Dynamic Hypergrowth ETF (HYP). 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.


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

CLCG vs. HYP - Sharpe Ratio Comparison


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


CLCGHYPDifference

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

1.20

0.92

+0.28

Drawdowns

CLCG vs. HYP - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CLCG drawdown since its inception was -16.32%, smaller than the maximum HYP drawdown of -19.58%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CLCG and HYP.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


CLCGHYPDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-16.32%

-19.58%

+3.26%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.32%

-2.27%

+0.95%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-3.84%

-6.45%

+2.61%

Volatility

CLCG vs. HYP - Volatility Comparison


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


CLCGHYPDifference

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

17.10%

41.01%

-23.91%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

17.10%

41.01%

-23.91%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

17.10%

41.01%

-23.91%

CLCG vs. HYP - Expense Ratio Comparison

CLCG has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is lower than HYP's 0.85% expense ratio.


Dividends

CLCG vs. HYP - Dividend Comparison

CLCG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.06%, less than HYP's 0.10% yield.


Frequently Asked Questions


CLCG and HYP have a correlation of 0.60, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

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.

CLCG is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.85% for HYP.

HYP has the higher dividend yield at 0.10%, compared with 0.06% for CLCG.

They also come from different issuers: Crossmark and Golden Eagle. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for CLCG and 0.85% for HYP.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for CLCG and HYP

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