PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
FITZ vs. CLCG
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

FITZ vs. CLCG - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Fitz-Gerald Must Have Portfolio ETF (FITZ) and Crossmark Large Cap Growth ETF (CLCG). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period


FITZ

1D
-0.53%
1M
1.78%
6M
YTD
1Y
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*

CLCG

1D
-1.28%
1M
0.01%
6M
4.97%
YTD
5.58%
1Y
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

FITZ vs. CLCG - Yearly Performance Comparison


Correlation

The correlation between FITZ and CLCG is 0.80, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.


Correlation
Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since May 28, 2026

0.80

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

FITZ vs. CLCG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Fitz-Gerald Must Have Portfolio ETF (FITZ) and Crossmark Large Cap Growth ETF (CLCG). 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.


Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.

FITZ vs. CLCG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison


Loading charts...

Drawdowns

FITZ vs. CLCG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FITZ drawdown since its inception was -7.37%, smaller than the maximum CLCG drawdown of -16.32%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FITZ and CLCG.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


FITZCLCGDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-7.37%

-16.32%

+8.95%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-3.11%

-4.32%

+1.21%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-4.03%

-3.85%

-0.18%

Volatility

FITZ vs. CLCG - Volatility Comparison


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


FITZCLCGDifference

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

17.03%

17.72%

-0.69%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

17.03%

17.72%

-0.69%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

17.03%

17.72%

-0.69%

FITZ vs. CLCG - Expense Ratio Comparison

FITZ has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is higher than CLCG's 0.50% expense ratio.


Dividends

FITZ vs. CLCG - Dividend Comparison

FITZ has not paid dividends to shareholders, while CLCG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.06%.


Frequently Asked Questions


FITZ and CLCG have a correlation of 0.80, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, CLCG is cheaper at 0.50% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

CLCG is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for FITZ.

CLCG has the higher dividend yield at 0.06%, compared with 0.00% for FITZ.

They also come from different issuers: Nicholas and Crossmark. Their fees differ too: 0.75% for FITZ and 0.50% for CLCG.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for FITZ and CLCG

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