CRBN vs. GRW

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

CRBN (iShares MSCI ACWI Low Carbon Target ETF) and GRW (TCW Durable Growth ETF) are both Large Cap Growth Equities funds. CRBN is passively managed, while GRW is actively managed. At a 0.40 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. CRBN charges 0.20%/yr vs 0.75%/yr for GRW.

Performance

CRBN vs. GRW - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares MSCI ACWI Low Carbon Target ETF (CRBN) and TCW Durable Growth ETF (GRW). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

CRBN

• 1D: -0.82%
• 1M: 4.91%
• YTD: 10.92%
• 6M: 11.82%
• 1Y: 27.48%
• 3Y*: 21.19%
• 5Y*: 11.10%
• 10Y*: 12.79%

GRW

• 1D: -0.32%
• 1M: —
• YTD: —
• 6M: —
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

CRBN vs. GRW - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)
CRBN iShares MSCI ACWI Low Carbon Target ETF	0.29%
GRW TCW Durable Growth ETF	1.29%

Correlation

The correlation between CRBN and GRW is 0.40, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 29, 2026	0.40

CRBN vs. GRW - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	CRBN	GRW
Technology	32.3%	26.6%
Financial Services	18.3%	9.8%
Communication Services	9.6%	9.1%
Industrials	9.4%	38.1%
Healthcare	8.1%	4.1%
Consumer Cyclical	7.7%	8.3%
Consumer Defensive	4.4%	-
Real Estate	2.9%	-
Basic Materials	2.5%	4.0%
Energy	2.2%	-
Utilities	2.2%	-

Return for Risk

CRBN vs. GRW — Risk / Return Rank

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

CRBN

CRBN Risk / Return Rank: 61
CRBN Sharpe Ratio Rank: 62
CRBN Sortino Ratio Rank: 62
CRBN Omega Ratio Rank: 61
CRBN Calmar Ratio Rank: 55
CRBN Martin Ratio Rank: 66

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.

CRBN vs. GRW - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI ACWI Low Carbon Target ETF (CRBN) 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.

	CRBN	GRW	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	2.12	—	—
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	2.94	—	—
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.38	—	—
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.74	—	—
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	12.10	—	—
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	CRBN	GRW	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.12	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.69	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.76	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.69	14.00	-13.30

Drawdowns

CRBN vs. GRW - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CRBN drawdown since its inception was -33.13%, which is greater than GRW's maximum drawdown of -0.45%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CRBN and GRW.

Drawdown Indicators

	CRBN	GRW	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-33.13%	-0.45%	-32.68%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-10.08%	—	—
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-16.60%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-27.04%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-33.13%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.82%	-0.45%	-0.37%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-5.20%	-0.14%	-5.06%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.28%	—	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	CRBN	GRW	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.72%	—	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	10.52%	—	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	13.05%	10.19%	+2.86%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	16.10%	10.19%	+5.91%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	16.90%	10.19%	+6.71%

CRBN vs. GRW - Expense Ratio Comparison

CRBN has a 0.20% expense ratio, which is lower than GRW's 0.75% expense ratio.

Dividends

CRBN vs. GRW - Dividend Comparison

CRBN's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.99%, while GRW has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
CRBN iShares MSCI ACWI Low Carbon Target ETF	1.99%	2.21%	1.94%	2.01%	1.95%	1.57%	1.41%	2.27%	2.51%	2.05%	2.27%	2.01%
GRW TCW Durable Growth ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CRBN and GRW in my portfolio?

CRBN and GRW have a correlation of 0.40, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, CRBN or GRW?

On fees, CRBN is cheaper at 0.20% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, CRBN or GRW?

CRBN is cheaper with a 0.20% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for GRW.

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

CRBN has the higher dividend yield at 1.99%, compared with 0.00% for GRW.

What is the main difference between CRBN and GRW?

They also come from different issuers: iShares and TCW. Their fees differ too: 0.20% for CRBN and 0.75% for GRW.