CNEQ vs. ILCG

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

CNEQ (Alger Concentrated Equity ETF) and ILCG (iShares Morningstar Growth ETF) are both Large Cap Growth Equities funds. CNEQ is actively managed, while ILCG is passively managed. Over the past year, CNEQ returned 49.78% vs 29.51% for ILCG. Their correlation of 0.92 suggests significant overlap in exposure. CNEQ charges 0.55%/yr vs 0.04%/yr for ILCG.

Performance

CNEQ vs. ILCG - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Alger Concentrated Equity ETF (CNEQ) and iShares Morningstar Growth ETF (ILCG). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CNEQ achieves a 19.72% return, which is significantly higher than ILCG's 14.48% return.

CNEQ

• 1D: -0.91%
• 1M: 11.24%
• YTD: 19.72%
• 6M: 19.16%
• 1Y: 49.78%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

ILCG

• 1D: -1.02%
• 1M: 7.68%
• YTD: 14.48%
• 6M: 14.61%
• 1Y: 29.51%
• 3Y*: 26.55%
• 5Y*: 14.95%
• 10Y*: 18.15%

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

CNEQ vs. ILCG - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
CNEQ Alger Concentrated Equity ETF	19.72%	33.61%	28.84%
ILCG iShares Morningstar Growth ETF	14.48%	16.71%	19.73%

Correlation

The correlation between CNEQ and ILCG is 0.88, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.88
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 8, 2024	0.92

The correlation between CNEQ and ILCG has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.88 to 0.92 - a consistent structural relationship.

CNEQ vs. ILCG - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	CNEQ	ILCG
Technology	47.4%	49.8%
Communication Services	19.2%	14.5%
Consumer Cyclical	13.4%	10.6%
Industrials	11.0%	8.3%
Healthcare	4.6%	5.3%
Utilities	2.9%	0.8%
Financial Services	1.6%	6.0%
Basic Materials	-	1.1%
Consumer Defensive	-	1.6%
Energy	-	0.5%
Real Estate	-	1.4%

Return for Risk

CNEQ vs. ILCG — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

CNEQ

CNEQ Risk / Return Rank: 57
CNEQ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 66
CNEQ Sortino Ratio Rank: 60
CNEQ Omega Ratio Rank: 60
CNEQ Calmar Ratio Rank: 52
CNEQ Martin Ratio Rank: 49

ILCG

ILCG Risk / Return Rank: 46
ILCG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 52
ILCG Sortino Ratio Rank: 49
ILCG Omega Ratio Rank: 50
ILCG Calmar Ratio Rank: 38
ILCG Martin Ratio Rank: 41

The rank (0–100) shows how this investment's returns compare to the risk taken. Higher = better. Based on the past 12 months of data, combining Sharpe, Sortino, and other metrics used by quantitative funds and institutional investors.

CNEQ vs. ILCG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Alger Concentrated Equity ETF (CNEQ) and iShares Morningstar Growth ETF (ILCG). 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.

	CNEQ	ILCG	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.22	1.82	+0.40
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.84	2.45	+0.39
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.37	1.32	+0.06
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.59	1.89	+0.70
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	8.16	6.68	+1.48
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

CNEQ vs. ILCG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CNEQ Sharpe Ratio is 2.22, which is comparable to the ILCG Sharpe Ratio of 1.82. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CNEQ and ILCG, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	CNEQ	ILCG	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.22	1.82	+0.40
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.68	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	0.85	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.51	0.59	+0.92

Drawdowns

CNEQ vs. ILCG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CNEQ drawdown since its inception was -27.58%, smaller than the maximum ILCG drawdown of -52.98%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CNEQ and ILCG.

Drawdown Indicators

	CNEQ	ILCG	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-27.58%	-52.98%	+25.40%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-19.30%	-15.65%	-3.65%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-23.10%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-35.38%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-35.38%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.91%	-1.02%	+0.11%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-4.89%	-8.22%	+3.33%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	6.12%	4.43%	+1.69%

Volatility

CNEQ vs. ILCG - Volatility Comparison

Alger Concentrated Equity ETF (CNEQ) has a higher volatility of 6.55% compared to iShares Morningstar Growth ETF (ILCG) at 4.40%. This indicates that CNEQ's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than ILCG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	CNEQ	ILCG	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.55%	4.40%	+2.15%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	17.19%	12.81%	+4.38%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	22.51%	16.31%	+6.20%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	26.62%	22.00%	+4.62%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	26.62%	21.53%	+5.09%

CNEQ vs. ILCG - Expense Ratio Comparison

CNEQ has a 0.55% expense ratio, which is higher than ILCG's 0.04% expense ratio.

Dividends

CNEQ vs. ILCG - Dividend Comparison

CNEQ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.44%, more than ILCG's 0.40% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
CNEQ Alger Concentrated Equity ETF	0.44%	0.52%	0.16%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
ILCG iShares Morningstar Growth ETF	0.40%	0.47%	0.50%	0.69%	0.75%	0.34%	0.28%	0.54%	0.81%	0.89%	0.95%	0.99%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CNEQ and ILCG in my portfolio?

CNEQ and ILCG have a correlation of 0.88, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, CNEQ or ILCG?

CNEQ has higher volatility (6.55%) compared to ILCG (4.40%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CNEQ dropped -27.58% vs ILCG's -52.98%.

Which ETF is better, CNEQ or ILCG?

On 1-year performance, CNEQ leads with 49.78% vs 29.51% for ILCG. On fees, ILCG is cheaper at 0.04% per year. On volatility, ILCG has been the lower-risk option at 4.40%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, CNEQ or ILCG?

Over the 1-year period, CNEQ has performed better with a 49.78% return vs 29.51%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, CNEQ or ILCG?

ILCG is cheaper with a 0.04% expense ratio, compared with 0.55% for CNEQ.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, CNEQ or ILCG?

CNEQ has the higher dividend yield at 0.44%, compared with 0.40% for ILCG.

What is the main difference between CNEQ and ILCG?

They also come from different issuers: Alger and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.55% for CNEQ and 0.04% for ILCG.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

CNEQ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.22 vs 1.82), meaning it's delivered slightly more return per unit of risk over the trailing 12 months. However, this ranking shifts over time - use the Risk/Return Score above for a more comprehensive view that combines Sharpe, Sortino, and other measures used by quantitative funds.