PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
CWS vs. DGRO
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

CWS vs. DGRO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in AdvisorShares Focused Equity ETF (CWS) and iShares Core Dividend Growth ETF (DGRO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CWS achieves a -1.80% return, which is significantly lower than DGRO's 8.76% return.


CWS

1D
-0.02%
1M
-0.37%
YTD
-1.80%
6M
-1.31%
1Y
-0.99%
3Y*
10.25%
5Y*
8.16%
10Y*

DGRO

1D
-0.28%
1M
3.14%
YTD
8.76%
6M
8.75%
1Y
22.54%
3Y*
16.99%
5Y*
10.54%
10Y*
13.30%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

CWS vs. DGRO - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
CWS
AdvisorShares Focused Equity ETF
-1.80%6.43%9.82%25.06%-10.42%22.20%17.12%30.97%-6.46%20.92%
DGRO
iShares Core Dividend Growth ETF
8.76%15.69%16.62%10.47%-7.91%26.64%9.50%29.87%-2.38%23.00%

Correlation

The correlation between CWS and DGRO is 0.71, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.71

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.79

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.83

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 22, 2016

0.77

The correlation between CWS and DGRO shifts across timeframes, from 0.71 (1 year) to 0.83 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

CWS vs. DGRO - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
CWS
DGRO

Healthcare

25.1%
16.4%

Industrials

22.4%
10.8%

Technology

18.5%
19.4%

Consumer Cyclical

15.1%
5.7%

Financial Services

10.8%
21.2%

Consumer Defensive

4.2%
11.5%

Utilities

4.0%
6.9%

Basic Materials

-

2.5%

Communication Services

-

0.1%

Energy

-

5.6%

Real Estate

-

-

Healthcare

CWS
25.1%
DGRO
16.4%

Industrials

CWS
22.4%
DGRO
10.8%

Technology

CWS
18.5%
DGRO
19.4%

Consumer Cyclical

CWS
15.1%
DGRO
5.7%

Financial Services

CWS
10.8%
DGRO
21.2%

Consumer Defensive

CWS
4.2%
DGRO
11.5%

Utilities

CWS
4.0%
DGRO
6.9%

Basic Materials

CWS

-

DGRO
2.5%

Communication Services

CWS

-

DGRO
0.1%

Energy

CWS

-

DGRO
5.6%

Real Estate

CWS

-

DGRO

-

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

CWS vs. DGRO — Risk / Return Rank

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

CWS
CWS Risk / Return Rank: 88
Overall Rank
CWS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 88
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CWS Sortino Ratio Rank: 77
Sortino Ratio Rank
CWS Omega Ratio Rank: 77
Omega Ratio Rank
CWS Calmar Ratio Rank: 88
Calmar Ratio Rank
CWS Martin Ratio Rank: 88
Martin Ratio Rank

DGRO
DGRO Risk / Return Rank: 7171
Overall Rank
DGRO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7171
Sharpe Ratio Rank
DGRO Sortino Ratio Rank: 7676
Sortino Ratio Rank
DGRO Omega Ratio Rank: 7070
Omega Ratio Rank
DGRO Calmar Ratio Rank: 6969
Calmar Ratio Rank
DGRO Martin Ratio Rank: 7171
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

CWS vs. DGRO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for AdvisorShares Focused Equity ETF (CWS) and iShares Core Dividend Growth ETF (DGRO). 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.


CWSDGRODifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-2.47

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-3.50

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.00

1.43

-0.43

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

-0.08

3.50

-3.58

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

-0.22

13.52

-13.74

CWS vs. DGRO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CWS Sharpe Ratio is -0.08, which is lower than the DGRO Sharpe Ratio of 2.39. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CWS and DGRO, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


CWSDGRODifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

-0.08

2.39

-2.47

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.52

0.77

-0.24

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.80

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.67

0.76

-0.10

Drawdowns

CWS vs. DGRO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CWS drawdown since its inception was -33.82%, roughly equal to the maximum DGRO drawdown of -35.10%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CWS and DGRO.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


CWSDGRODifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-33.82%

-35.10%

+1.28%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-11.92%

-6.47%

-5.45%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-16.56%

-14.03%

-2.53%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-24.87%

-19.31%

-5.56%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-35.10%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-6.21%

-0.28%

-5.93%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-4.54%

-3.44%

-1.10%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

4.61%

1.67%

+2.94%

Volatility

CWS vs. DGRO - Volatility Comparison

AdvisorShares Focused Equity ETF (CWS) has a higher volatility of 3.27% compared to iShares Core Dividend Growth ETF (DGRO) at 2.21%. This indicates that CWS's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than DGRO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


CWSDGRODifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.27%

2.21%

+1.06%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

10.29%

6.91%

+3.38%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

13.28%

9.48%

+3.80%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

15.66%

13.82%

+1.84%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

16.91%

16.62%

+0.29%

CWS vs. DGRO - Expense Ratio Comparison

CWS has a 0.77% expense ratio, which is higher than DGRO's 0.08% expense ratio.


Dividends

CWS vs. DGRO - Dividend Comparison

CWS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.31%, less than DGRO's 1.96% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
CWS
AdvisorShares Focused Equity ETF
0.31%0.31%0.59%0.25%0.50%0.16%0.27%0.39%2.07%0.29%0.03%0.00%
DGRO
iShares Core Dividend Growth ETF
1.96%2.09%2.26%2.45%2.34%1.93%2.30%2.21%2.44%2.03%2.27%2.52%

Frequently Asked Questions


CWS and DGRO have a correlation of 0.71, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

CWS has higher volatility (3.27%) compared to DGRO (2.21%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CWS dropped -33.82% vs DGRO's -35.10%.

On 5-year performance, DGRO leads with 10.54% vs 8.16% for CWS. On fees, DGRO is cheaper at 0.08% per year. On volatility, DGRO has been the lower-risk option at 2.21%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 5-year period, DGRO has performed better with a 10.54% return vs 8.16%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

DGRO is cheaper with a 0.08% expense ratio, compared with 0.77% for CWS.

DGRO has the higher dividend yield at 1.96%, compared with 0.31% for CWS.

They also come from different issuers: AdvisorShares and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.77% for CWS and 0.08% for DGRO.

DGRO currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.39 vs -0.07), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for CWS and DGRO

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