PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
FSGS vs. VTWG
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

FSGS vs. VTWG - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in First Trust SMID Growth Strength ETF (FSGS) and Vanguard Russell 2000 Growth ETF (VTWG). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FSGS achieves a 1.27% return, which is significantly lower than VTWG's 16.90% return.


FSGS

1D
-0.37%
1M
0.83%
YTD
1.27%
6M
0.20%
1Y
4.81%
3Y*
7.06%
5Y*
2.19%
10Y*

VTWG

1D
-1.35%
1M
4.49%
YTD
16.90%
6M
15.29%
1Y
37.62%
3Y*
18.23%
5Y*
5.70%
10Y*
11.33%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

FSGS vs. VTWG - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
FSGS
First Trust SMID Growth Strength ETF
1.27%2.41%6.38%15.98%-13.17%25.56%10.26%21.31%-11.92%10.39%
VTWG
Vanguard Russell 2000 Growth ETF
16.90%13.07%15.15%18.90%-26.49%2.84%34.72%28.75%-9.45%11.08%

Correlation

The correlation between FSGS and VTWG is 0.82, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.


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

0.82

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

0.86

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

0.85

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 23, 2017

0.77

The correlation between FSGS and VTWG has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.77 to 0.86 - a consistent structural relationship.

FSGS vs. VTWG - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
FSGS
VTWG

Industrials

22.0%
23.1%

Financial Services

19.5%
8.2%

Technology

18.8%
23.5%

Healthcare

16.7%
22.4%

Consumer Cyclical

8.0%
7.7%

Consumer Defensive

5.0%
2.6%

Energy

4.2%
3.5%

Communication Services

3.1%
2.2%

Basic Materials

1.7%
4.2%

Real Estate

0.9%
2.1%

Utilities

-

0.7%

Industrials

FSGS
22.0%
VTWG
23.1%

Financial Services

FSGS
19.5%
VTWG
8.2%

Technology

FSGS
18.8%
VTWG
23.5%

Healthcare

FSGS
16.7%
VTWG
22.4%

Consumer Cyclical

FSGS
8.0%
VTWG
7.7%

Consumer Defensive

FSGS
5.0%
VTWG
2.6%

Energy

FSGS
4.2%
VTWG
3.5%

Communication Services

FSGS
3.1%
VTWG
2.2%

Basic Materials

FSGS
1.7%
VTWG
4.2%

Real Estate

FSGS
0.9%
VTWG
2.1%

Utilities

FSGS

-

VTWG
0.7%

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

FSGS vs. VTWG — Risk / Return Rank

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

FSGS
FSGS Risk / Return Rank: 1414
Overall Rank
FSGS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1414
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FSGS Sortino Ratio Rank: 1313
Sortino Ratio Rank
FSGS Omega Ratio Rank: 1313
Omega Ratio Rank
FSGS Calmar Ratio Rank: 1414
Calmar Ratio Rank
FSGS Martin Ratio Rank: 1515
Martin Ratio Rank

VTWG
VTWG Risk / Return Rank: 4949
Overall Rank
VTWG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5050
Sharpe Ratio Rank
VTWG Sortino Ratio Rank: 4949
Sortino Ratio Rank
VTWG Omega Ratio Rank: 4545
Omega Ratio Rank
VTWG Calmar Ratio Rank: 5050
Calmar Ratio Rank
VTWG Martin Ratio Rank: 5353
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.

FSGS vs. VTWG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for First Trust SMID Growth Strength ETF (FSGS) and Vanguard Russell 2000 Growth ETF (VTWG). 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.


FSGSVTWGDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-1.44

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-1.88

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.06

1.29

-0.23

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

0.43

2.54

-2.11

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

1.21

9.16

-7.95

FSGS vs. VTWG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FSGS Sharpe Ratio is 0.32, which is lower than the VTWG Sharpe Ratio of 1.76. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FSGS and VTWG, 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


FSGSVTWGDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.32

1.76

-1.44

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.11

0.23

-0.12

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.47

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.30

0.52

-0.22

Drawdowns

FSGS vs. VTWG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FSGS drawdown since its inception was -43.26%, roughly equal to the maximum VTWG drawdown of -42.07%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FSGS and VTWG.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


FSGSVTWGDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-43.26%

-42.07%

-1.19%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-11.31%

-14.88%

+3.57%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-24.08%

-28.58%

+4.50%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-24.08%

-40.49%

+16.41%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-42.07%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-4.73%

-1.39%

-3.34%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-8.03%

-10.53%

+2.50%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.97%

4.12%

-0.15%

Volatility

FSGS vs. VTWG - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for First Trust SMID Growth Strength ETF (FSGS) is 3.74%, while Vanguard Russell 2000 Growth ETF (VTWG) has a volatility of 6.62%. This indicates that FSGS experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than VTWG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


FSGSVTWGDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.74%

6.62%

-2.88%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

10.73%

15.90%

-5.17%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

15.24%

21.50%

-6.26%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

20.14%

24.52%

-4.38%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

22.81%

24.21%

-1.40%

FSGS vs. VTWG - Expense Ratio Comparison

FSGS has a 0.60% expense ratio, which is higher than VTWG's 0.15% expense ratio.


Dividends

FSGS vs. VTWG - Dividend Comparison

FSGS has not paid dividends to shareholders, while VTWG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.59%.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
FSGS
First Trust SMID Growth Strength ETF
0.00%0.00%2.71%2.29%1.95%1.35%1.32%1.77%2.13%1.15%0.00%0.00%
VTWG
Vanguard Russell 2000 Growth ETF
0.59%0.64%0.55%0.79%0.71%0.54%0.48%0.72%0.72%0.64%0.96%0.72%

Frequently Asked Questions


FSGS and VTWG have a correlation of 0.82, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

VTWG has higher volatility (6.62%) compared to FSGS (3.74%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FSGS dropped -43.26% vs VTWG's -42.07%.

On 5-year performance, VTWG leads with 5.70% vs 2.19% for FSGS. On fees, VTWG is cheaper at 0.15% per year. On volatility, FSGS has been the lower-risk option at 3.74%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 5-year period, VTWG has performed better with a 5.70% return vs 2.19%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

VTWG is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for FSGS.

VTWG has the higher dividend yield at 0.59%, compared with 0.00% for FSGS.

FSGS tracks SMID Growth Strength Index, while VTWG tracks Russell 2000 Growth Index. They also come from different issuers: First Trust and Vanguard. Their fees differ too: 0.60% for FSGS and 0.15% for VTWG.

VTWG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.76 vs 0.32), 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 FSGS and VTWG

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