CLCG vs. SPYG
CLCG (Crossmark Large Cap Growth ETF) and SPYG (State Street SPDR Portfolio S&P 500 Growth ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - CLCG is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund actively managed by Crossmark, while SPYG is a S&P 500 fund tracking the S&P 500 Growth Index. CLCG is actively managed, while SPYG is passively managed. With a 0.95 correlation, they move nearly in lockstep. CLCG charges 0.50%/yr vs 0.04%/yr for SPYG.
Performance
CLCG vs. SPYG - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, CLCG achieves a 9.02% return, which is significantly lower than SPYG's 13.73% return.
CLCG
- 1D
- 0.11%
- 1M
- 5.58%
- YTD
- 9.02%
- 6M
- 8.51%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
SPYG
- 1D
- -0.02%
- 1M
- 6.54%
- YTD
- 13.73%
- 6M
- 13.08%
- 1Y
- 33.66%
- 3Y*
- 28.20%
- 5Y*
- 16.07%
- 10Y*
- 18.16%
CLCG vs. SPYG - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
CLCG Crossmark Large Cap Growth ETF | 9.02% | 7.85% |
SPYG State Street SPDR Portfolio S&P 500 Growth ETF | 13.73% | 9.32% |
Correlation
The correlation between CLCG and SPYG is 0.95 - 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 24, 2025 | 0.95 |
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. SPYG — Risk / Return Rank
CLCG
SPYG
CLCG vs. SPYG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Crossmark Large Cap Growth ETF (CLCG) and State Street SPDR Portfolio S&P 500 Growth ETF (SPYG). 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.
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| CLCG | SPYG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | — | 2.11 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | — | 0.76 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | — | 0.88 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 1.21 | 0.35 | +0.86 |
Drawdowns
CLCG vs. SPYG - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CLCG drawdown since its inception was -16.32%, smaller than the maximum SPYG drawdown of -67.63%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CLCG and SPYG.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| CLCG | SPYG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -16.32% | -67.63% | +51.31% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | — | -13.76% | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -22.14% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -32.67% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -32.67% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -1.21% | -1.15% | -0.06% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -3.83% | -24.32% | +20.49% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | — | 3.32% | — |
Volatility
CLCG vs. SPYG - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| CLCG | SPYG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | — | 4.34% | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | — | 12.46% | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 17.06% | 16.06% | +1.00% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 17.06% | 21.16% | -4.10% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 17.06% | 20.64% | -3.58% |
CLCG vs. SPYG - Expense Ratio Comparison
CLCG has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is higher than SPYG's 0.04% expense ratio.
Dividends
CLCG vs. SPYG - Dividend Comparison
CLCG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.06%, less than SPYG's 0.47% 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% |
SPYG State Street SPDR Portfolio S&P 500 Growth ETF | 0.47% | 0.52% | 0.60% | 1.15% | 1.03% | 0.62% | 0.90% | 1.37% | 1.51% | 1.41% | 1.55% | 1.57% |
Frequently Asked Questions
With a correlation of 0.95, CLCG and SPYG 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, SPYG is cheaper at 0.04% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
SPYG is cheaper with a 0.04% expense ratio, compared with 0.50% for CLCG.
SPYG has the higher dividend yield at 0.47%, compared with 0.06% for CLCG.
CLCG is categorized as Large Cap Growth Equities, while SPYG is S&P 500. They also come from different issuers: Crossmark and State Street. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for CLCG and 0.04% for SPYG.
Find the right allocation for CLCG and SPYG
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