PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
GFLW vs. ILCG
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

GFLW vs. ILCG

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

GFLW (VictoryShares Free Cash Flow Growth ETF) and ILCG (iShares Morningstar Growth ETF) are both Large Cap Growth Equities funds - GFLW tracks the Victory Free Cash Flow Growth Index while ILCG tracks the Morningstar US Large-Mid Cap Broad Growth Index Gross. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, GFLW returned 29.44% vs 29.51% for ILCG. Their correlation of 0.90 suggests significant overlap in exposure. GFLW charges 0.39%/yr vs 0.04%/yr for ILCG.

Performance

GFLW vs. ILCG - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in VictoryShares Free Cash Flow Growth ETF (GFLW) and iShares Morningstar Growth ETF (ILCG). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, GFLW achieves a 16.55% return, which is significantly higher than ILCG's 14.48% return.

GFLW

1D
-0.19%
1M
10.36%
YTD
16.55%
6M
15.42%
1Y
29.44%
3Y*
—
5Y*
—
10Y*
—

ILCG

1D
-1.02%
1M
7.68%
YTD
14.48%
6M
14.61%
1Y
29.51%
3Y*
26.55%
5Y*
14.95%
10Y*
18.15%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

GFLW vs. ILCG - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)20252024
GFLW
VictoryShares Free Cash Flow Growth ETF		16.55%18.40%-6.12%
ILCG
iShares Morningstar Growth ETF		14.48%16.71%-3.23%

Correlation

The correlation between GFLW and ILCG is 0.88, 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

0.88

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 5, 2024

0.90

The correlation between GFLW and ILCG has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.88 to 0.90 - a consistent structural relationship.

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.

VictoryShares Free Cash Flow Growth ETF

iShares Morningstar Growth ETF

Often compared with GFLW:
GFLW vs. GCOWGFLW vs. VFLOGFLW vs. SFLOGFLW vs. SPYGFLW vs. UCRDGFLW vs. MODLGFLW vs. BIBL
Often compared with ILCG:
ILCG vs. SCHGILCG vs. IUSGILCG vs. VUGILCG vs. QQQILCG vs. ILCBILCG vs. VOOILCG vs. MGK

Return for Risk

GFLW vs. ILCG — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
GFLW
GFLW Risk / Return Rank: 4242
Overall Rank
GFLW Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4444
Sharpe Ratio Rank
GFLW Sortino Ratio Rank: 4242
Sortino Ratio Rank
GFLW Omega Ratio Rank: 4141
Omega Ratio Rank
GFLW Calmar Ratio Rank: 4141
Calmar Ratio Rank
GFLW Martin Ratio Rank: 4242
Martin Ratio Rank
ILCG
ILCG Risk / Return Rank: 4646
Overall Rank
ILCG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5252
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ILCG Sortino Ratio Rank: 4949
Sortino Ratio Rank
ILCG Omega Ratio Rank: 5050
Omega Ratio Rank
ILCG Calmar Ratio Rank: 3838
Calmar Ratio Rank
ILCG Martin Ratio Rank: 4141
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.

GFLW vs. ILCG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for VictoryShares Free Cash Flow Growth ETF (GFLW) and iShares Morningstar Growth ETF (ILCG). 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.

GFLWILCGDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
1.53
1.82

-0.29

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
2.12
2.45

-0.33

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.26

1.32

-0.05

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.98

1.89

+0.08

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

6.72

6.68

+0.04

Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

GFLW vs. ILCG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current GFLW Sharpe Ratio is 1.53, which is comparable to the ILCG Sharpe Ratio of 1.82. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of GFLW and ILCG, 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

GFLWILCGDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.53

1.82

-0.29

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

—

0.68

—

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

—

0.85

—

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.78

0.59

+0.19

Drawdowns

GFLW vs. ILCG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GFLW drawdown since its inception was -24.14%, smaller than the maximum ILCG drawdown of -52.98%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GFLW and ILCG.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

GFLWILCGDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-24.14%

-52.98%

+28.84%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-14.95%

-15.65%

+0.70%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

—

-23.10%

—

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

—

-35.38%

—

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

—

-35.38%

—

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.19%

-1.02%

+0.83%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-4.64%

-8.22%

+3.58%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

4.39%

4.43%

-0.04%

Volatility

GFLW vs. ILCG - Volatility Comparison

VictoryShares Free Cash Flow Growth ETF (GFLW) has a higher volatility of 5.44% compared to iShares Morningstar Growth ETF (ILCG) at 4.40%. This indicates that GFLW's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than ILCG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

GFLWILCGDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

5.44%

4.40%

+1.04%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

14.94%

12.81%

+2.13%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

19.30%

16.31%

+2.99%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

24.57%

22.00%

+2.57%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

24.57%

21.53%

+3.04%

GFLW vs. ILCG - Expense Ratio Comparison

GFLW has a 0.39% expense ratio, which is higher than ILCG's 0.04% expense ratio.

Dividends

GFLW vs. ILCG - Dividend Comparison

GFLW's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.01%, less than ILCG's 0.40% yield.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
GFLW
VictoryShares Free Cash Flow Growth ETF		0.01%0.02%0.01%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
ILCG
iShares Morningstar Growth ETF		0.40%0.47%0.50%0.69%0.75%0.34%0.28%0.54%0.81%0.89%0.95%0.99%

Frequently Asked Questions

GFLW and ILCG have a correlation of 0.88, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

GFLW has higher volatility (5.44%) compared to ILCG (4.40%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GFLW dropped -24.14% vs ILCG's -52.98%.

On 1-year performance, ILCG leads with 29.51% vs 29.44% for GFLW. On fees, ILCG is cheaper at 0.04% per year. On volatility, ILCG has been the lower-risk option at 4.40%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, ILCG has performed better with a 29.51% return vs 29.44%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

ILCG is cheaper with a 0.04% expense ratio, compared with 0.39% for GFLW.

ILCG has the higher dividend yield at 0.40%, compared with 0.01% for GFLW.

GFLW tracks Victory Free Cash Flow Growth Index, while ILCG tracks Morningstar US Large-Mid Cap Broad Growth Index Gross. They also come from different issuers: Victory and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.39% for GFLW and 0.04% for ILCG.

ILCG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.82 vs 1.53), 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 GFLW and ILCG

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