FLCG vs. DGRO

Last updated Aug 2, 2026

FLCG (Federated Hermes MDT Large Cap Growth ETF) and DGRO (iShares Core Dividend Growth ETF) are both Large Cap Growth Equities funds. FLCG is actively managed, while DGRO is passively managed. Over the past year, FLCG returned 10.54% vs 24.21% for DGRO. Their 0.50 correlation means their historical movements had little consistent relationship. FLCG charges 0.39%/yr vs 0.08%/yr for DGRO.

Performance

FLCG vs. DGRO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Federated Hermes MDT Large Cap Growth ETF (FLCG) and iShares Core Dividend Growth ETF (DGRO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FLCG achieves a 2.09% return, which is significantly lower than DGRO's 13.39% return.

FLCG

• 1D: 0.93%
• 1M: 0.21%
• 6M: 4.34%
• YTD: 2.09%
• 1Y: 10.54%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 16.18%

DGRO

• 1D: -0.28%
• 1M: 0.97%
• 6M: 9.59%
• YTD: 13.39%
• 1Y: 24.21%
• 3Y*: 16.30%
• 5Y*: 11.08%
• 10Y*: 13.44%
• ALL TIME*: 12.47%

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
DGRO iShares Core Dividend Growth ETF	$103.52M	$104.25M	$110.17M
FLCG Federated Hermes MDT Large Cap Growth ETF	$2.20M	$2.46M	$2.52M

FLCG vs. DGRO - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
FLCG Federated Hermes MDT Large Cap Growth ETF	2.09%	16.87%	13.11%
DGRO iShares Core Dividend Growth ETF	13.39%	15.69%	3.43%

Correlation

The correlation between FLCG and DGRO is 0.39, which is low. Their historical price movements had little consistent relationship.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.39
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 31, 2024	0.50

The correlation between FLCG and DGRO shifts across timeframes, from 0.39 (1 year) to 0.50 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

FLCG vs. DGRO - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	FLCG	DGRO
Technology	56.8%	17.3%
Communication Services	14.8%	0.1%
Consumer Cyclical	9.4%	6.5%
Industrials	5.5%	11.3%
Healthcare	5.4%	17.9%
Financial Services	3.2%	20.4%
Utilities	3.2%	7.3%
Consumer Defensive	0.8%	11.9%
Basic Materials	0.7%	2.5%
Energy	0.2%	4.8%
Real Estate	-	-

Return for Risk

FLCG vs. DGRO — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

FLCG

FLCG Risk / Return Rank: 22
FLCG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 23
FLCG Sortino Ratio Rank: 22
FLCG Omega Ratio Rank: 22
FLCG Calmar Ratio Rank: 20
FLCG Martin Ratio Rank: 23

DGRO

DGRO Risk / Return Rank: 91
DGRO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 93
DGRO Sortino Ratio Rank: 93
DGRO Omega Ratio Rank: 92
DGRO Calmar Ratio Rank: 88
DGRO Martin Ratio Rank: 90

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

FLCG vs. DGRO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Federated Hermes MDT Large Cap Growth ETF (FLCG) 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.

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.

	FLCG	DGRO	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.48	2.44	-1.96
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.77	3.55	-2.78
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.09	1.45	-0.35
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.54	3.61	-3.07
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	1.65	14.07	-12.42

FLCG vs. DGRO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FLCG Sharpe Ratio is 0.48, which is lower than the DGRO Sharpe Ratio of 2.44. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FLCG 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.

Drawdowns

FLCG vs. DGRO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FLCG drawdown since its inception was -22.95%, smaller than the maximum DGRO drawdown of -35.10%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FLCG and DGRO.

Drawdown Indicators

	FLCG	DGRO	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-22.95%	-35.10%	+12.15%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-15.07%	-6.47%	-8.60%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-14.03%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-19.31%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-35.10%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-4.42%	-1.35%	-3.07%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.75%	-3.41%	-0.34%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.91%	1.66%	+3.25%

Volatility

FLCG vs. DGRO - Volatility Comparison

Federated Hermes MDT Large Cap Growth ETF (FLCG) has a higher volatility of 5.39% compared to iShares Core Dividend Growth ETF (DGRO) at 3.21%. This indicates that FLCG'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.

Volatility by Period

	FLCG	DGRO	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.39%	3.21%	+2.18%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	13.16%	7.12%	+6.04%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	16.75%	9.61%	+7.14%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	20.99%	13.79%	+7.20%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	20.99%	16.58%	+4.41%

FLCG vs. DGRO - Expense Ratio Comparison

FLCG has a 0.39% expense ratio, which is higher than DGRO's 0.08% expense ratio.

Dividends

FLCG vs. DGRO - Dividend Comparison

FLCG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.05%, less than DGRO's 1.89% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
DGRO iShares Core Dividend Growth ETF	1.89%	2.09%	2.26%	2.45%	2.34%	1.93%	2.30%	2.21%	2.44%	2.03%	2.27%	2.52%
FLCG Federated Hermes MDT Large Cap Growth ETF	0.05%	0.05%	0.06%	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 FLCG and DGRO in my portfolio?

FLCG and DGRO have a correlation of 0.39, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, FLCG or DGRO?

FLCG has higher volatility (5.39%) compared to DGRO (3.21%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FLCG dropped -22.95% vs DGRO's -35.10%.

Which ETF is better, FLCG or DGRO?

On 1-year performance, DGRO leads with 24.21% vs 10.54% for FLCG. On fees, DGRO is cheaper at 0.08% per year. On volatility, DGRO has been the lower-risk option at 3.21%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FLCG or DGRO?

Over the 1-year period, DGRO has performed better with a 24.21% return vs 10.54%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FLCG or DGRO?

DGRO is cheaper with a 0.08% expense ratio, compared with 0.39% for FLCG.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, FLCG or DGRO?

DGRO has the higher dividend yield at 1.89%, compared with 0.05% for FLCG.

What is the main difference between FLCG and DGRO?

They also come from different issuers: Federated and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.39% for FLCG and 0.08% for DGRO.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

DGRO currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.44 vs 0.48), 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.