CLCG vs. IUSG
CLCG (Crossmark Large Cap Growth ETF) and IUSG (iShares Core S&P U.S. Growth ETF) are both Large Cap Growth Equities funds. CLCG is actively managed, while IUSG is passively managed. With a 0.96 correlation, they move nearly in lockstep. CLCG charges 0.50%/yr vs 0.04%/yr for IUSG.
Performance
CLCG vs. IUSG - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, CLCG achieves a 4.16% return, which is significantly lower than IUSG's 8.94% return.
CLCG
- 1D
- -0.38%
- 1M
- -2.85%
- YTD
- 4.16%
- 6M
- 2.34%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
IUSG
- 1D
- -0.23%
- 1M
- -2.08%
- YTD
- 8.94%
- 6M
- 7.38%
- 1Y
- 24.89%
- 3Y*
- 24.91%
- 5Y*
- 13.70%
- 10Y*
- 17.74%
CLCG vs. IUSG - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
CLCG Crossmark Large Cap Growth ETF | 4.16% | 8.42% |
IUSG iShares Core S&P U.S. Growth ETF | 8.94% | 10.08% |
Correlation
The correlation between CLCG and IUSG 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 (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 23, 2025 | 0.96 |
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. IUSG — Risk / Return Rank
CLCG
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
IUSG
CLCG vs. IUSG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Crossmark Large Cap Growth ETF (CLCG) and iShares Core S&P U.S. Growth ETF (IUSG). 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 | IUSG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | — | 1.26 | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | — | 1.91 | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | — | 7.76 | — |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
CLCG vs. IUSG - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CLCG drawdown since its inception was -16.32%, smaller than the maximum IUSG drawdown of -63.41%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CLCG and IUSG.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| CLCG | IUSG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -16.32% | -63.41% | +47.09% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | — | -13.07% | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -22.28% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -32.21% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -32.35% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -5.61% | -5.45% | -0.16% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -3.84% | -21.40% | +17.56% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | — | 3.22% | — |
Volatility
CLCG vs. IUSG - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| CLCG | IUSG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | — | 7.16% | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | — | 13.61% | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 17.66% | 16.89% | +0.77% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 17.66% | 21.06% | -3.40% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 17.66% | 20.48% | -2.82% |
CLCG vs. IUSG - Expense Ratio Comparison
CLCG has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is higher than IUSG's 0.04% expense ratio.
Dividends
CLCG vs. IUSG - Dividend Comparison
CLCG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.06%, less than IUSG's 0.51% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CLCG Crossmark Large Cap Growth ETF | 0.06% | 0.07% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
IUSG iShares Core S&P U.S. Growth ETF | 0.51% | 0.53% | 0.59% | 1.12% | 1.07% | 0.59% | 0.93% | 1.64% | 1.32% | 1.28% | 1.48% | 1.29% |
Frequently Asked Questions
With a correlation of 0.96, CLCG and IUSG 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.
On fees, IUSG is cheaper at 0.04% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
IUSG is cheaper with a 0.04% expense ratio, compared with 0.50% for CLCG.
IUSG has the higher dividend yield at 0.51%, compared with 0.06% for CLCG.
They also come from different issuers: Crossmark and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for CLCG and 0.04% for IUSG.
Find the right allocation for CLCG and IUSG
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