FLXR vs. GRW
FLXR (TCW Flexible Income ETF) and GRW (TCW Durable Growth ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - FLXR is a Multisector Bonds fund actively managed by TCW, while GRW is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund actively managed by TCW. Both are actively managed. At a 0.40 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. FLXR charges 0.40%/yr vs 0.75%/yr for GRW.
Performance
FLXR vs. GRW - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
FLXR
- 1D
- -0.18%
- 1M
- 0.36%
- YTD
- 1.09%
- 6M
- 1.43%
- 1Y
- 5.89%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
GRW
- 1D
- -0.32%
- 1M
- —
- YTD
- —
- 6M
- —
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
FLXR vs. GRW - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | |
|---|---|
FLXR TCW Flexible Income ETF | -0.15% |
GRW TCW Durable Growth ETF | 1.29% |
Correlation
The correlation between FLXR 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 |
FLXR vs. GRW - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
FLXR
GRW
Healthcare
Real Estate
-
Basic Materials
-
Communication Services
-
Consumer Cyclical
-
Consumer Defensive
-
-
Energy
-
-
Financial Services
-
Industrials
-
Technology
-
Utilities
-
-
Healthcare
FLXR
GRW
Real Estate
FLXR
GRW
-
Basic Materials
FLXR
-
GRW
Communication Services
FLXR
-
GRW
Consumer Cyclical
FLXR
-
GRW
Consumer Defensive
FLXR
-
GRW
-
Energy
FLXR
-
GRW
-
Financial Services
FLXR
-
GRW
Industrials
FLXR
-
GRW
Technology
FLXR
-
GRW
Utilities
FLXR
-
GRW
-
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
FLXR vs. GRW — Risk / Return Rank
FLXR
GRW
FLXR vs. GRW - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for TCW Flexible Income ETF (FLXR) 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.
| FLXR | GRW | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.51 | — | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 4.04 | — | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 17.36 | — | — |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| FLXR | GRW | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.61 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 2.65 | 14.00 | -11.35 |
Drawdowns
FLXR vs. GRW - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum FLXR drawdown since its inception was -1.94%, which is greater than GRW's maximum drawdown of -0.45%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FLXR and GRW.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| FLXR | GRW | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -1.94% | -0.45% | -1.49% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -1.46% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.23% | -0.45% | +0.22% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -0.36% | -0.14% | -0.22% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 0.34% | — | — |
Volatility
FLXR vs. GRW - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| FLXR | GRW | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 0.76% | — | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 1.65% | — | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.26% | 10.19% | -7.93% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 2.79% | 10.19% | -7.40% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 2.79% | 10.19% | -7.40% |
FLXR vs. GRW - Expense Ratio Comparison
FLXR has a 0.40% expense ratio, which is lower than GRW's 0.75% expense ratio.
Dividends
FLXR vs. GRW - Dividend Comparison
FLXR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.82%, while GRW has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 |
|---|---|---|---|
FLXR TCW Flexible Income ETF | 5.82% | 5.66% | 3.44% |
GRW TCW Durable Growth ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
FLXR 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.
On fees, FLXR is cheaper at 0.40% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
FLXR is cheaper with a 0.40% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for GRW.
FLXR has the higher dividend yield at 5.82%, compared with 0.00% for GRW.
FLXR is categorized as Multisector Bonds, while GRW is Large Cap Growth Equities. Their fees differ too: 0.40% for FLXR and 0.75% for GRW.
Find the right allocation for FLXR and GRW
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