PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
GGRW vs. ILCG
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

GGRW vs. ILCG - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Gabelli Growth Innovators ETF (GGRW) 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, GGRW achieves a 6.11% return, which is significantly lower than ILCG's 14.48% return.


GGRW

1D
-0.84%
1M
4.23%
YTD
6.11%
6M
5.58%
1Y
17.42%
3Y*
27.06%
5Y*
9.85%
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)

GGRW vs. ILCG - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024202320222021
GGRW
Gabelli Growth Innovators ETF
6.11%18.29%41.78%42.19%-43.92%5.40%
ILCG
iShares Morningstar Growth ETF
14.48%16.71%32.82%40.41%-31.75%15.94%

Correlation

The correlation between GGRW and ILCG is 0.94, 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

0.94

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

0.93

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

0.94

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 17, 2021

0.94

The correlation between GGRW and ILCG has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.93 to 0.94 - a consistent structural relationship.

GGRW vs. ILCG - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
GGRW
ILCG

Technology

37.1%
49.8%

Communication Services

14.6%
14.5%

Industrials

10.9%
8.3%

Consumer Cyclical

10.6%
10.6%

Financial Services

9.3%
6.0%

Healthcare

8.1%
5.3%

Utilities

3.9%
0.8%

Basic Materials

1.2%
1.1%

Consumer Defensive

0.7%
1.6%

Energy

-

0.5%

Real Estate

-

1.4%

Technology

GGRW
37.1%
ILCG
49.8%

Communication Services

GGRW
14.6%
ILCG
14.5%

Industrials

GGRW
10.9%
ILCG
8.3%

Consumer Cyclical

GGRW
10.6%
ILCG
10.6%

Financial Services

GGRW
9.3%
ILCG
6.0%

Healthcare

GGRW
8.1%
ILCG
5.3%

Utilities

GGRW
3.9%
ILCG
0.8%

Basic Materials

GGRW
1.2%
ILCG
1.1%

Consumer Defensive

GGRW
0.7%
ILCG
1.6%

Energy

GGRW

-

ILCG
0.5%

Real Estate

GGRW

-

ILCG
1.4%

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

GGRW vs. ILCG — Risk / Return Rank

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

GGRW
GGRW Risk / Return Rank: 3131
Overall Rank
GGRW Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3333
Sharpe Ratio Rank
GGRW Sortino Ratio Rank: 3232
Sortino Ratio Rank
GGRW Omega Ratio Rank: 3131
Omega Ratio Rank
GGRW Calmar Ratio Rank: 2828
Calmar Ratio Rank
GGRW Martin Ratio Rank: 3333
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.

GGRW vs. ILCG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Gabelli Growth Innovators ETF (GGRW) 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.


GGRWILCGDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.63

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.74

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.21

1.32

-0.11

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.33

1.89

-0.57

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

5.00

6.68

-1.67

GGRW vs. ILCG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current GGRW Sharpe Ratio is 1.19, which is lower than the ILCG Sharpe Ratio of 1.82. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of GGRW 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


GGRWILCGDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.19

1.82

-0.63

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.39

0.68

-0.29

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.85

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.31

0.59

-0.28

Drawdowns

GGRW vs. ILCG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GGRW drawdown since its inception was -50.28%, smaller than the maximum ILCG drawdown of -52.98%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GGRW and ILCG.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


GGRWILCGDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-50.28%

-52.98%

+2.70%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-13.19%

-15.65%

+2.46%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-20.53%

-23.10%

+2.57%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-50.28%

-35.38%

-14.90%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-35.38%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.90%

-1.02%

+0.12%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-17.39%

-8.22%

-9.17%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.49%

4.43%

-0.94%

Volatility

GGRW vs. ILCG - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Gabelli Growth Innovators ETF (GGRW) is 3.86%, while iShares Morningstar Growth ETF (ILCG) has a volatility of 4.40%. This indicates that GGRW experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than ILCG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


GGRWILCGDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.86%

4.40%

-0.54%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

11.64%

12.81%

-1.17%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

14.73%

16.31%

-1.58%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

25.33%

22.00%

+3.33%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

25.50%

21.53%

+3.97%

GGRW vs. ILCG - Expense Ratio Comparison

GGRW has a 0.90% expense ratio, which is higher than ILCG's 0.04% expense ratio.


Dividends

GGRW vs. ILCG - Dividend Comparison

GGRW's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.40%, which matches ILCG's 0.40% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
GGRW
Gabelli Growth Innovators ETF
0.40%0.43%0.00%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


With a correlation of 0.94, GGRW and ILCG move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

ILCG has higher volatility (4.40%) compared to GGRW (3.86%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GGRW dropped -50.28% vs ILCG's -52.98%.

On 5-year performance, ILCG leads with 14.95% vs 9.85% for GGRW. On fees, ILCG is cheaper at 0.04% per year. On volatility, GGRW has been the lower-risk option at 3.86%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 5-year period, ILCG has performed better with a 14.95% return vs 9.85%. 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 0.90% for GGRW.

GGRW and ILCG have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.40%.

They also come from different issuers: GAMCO Investors, Inc. and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.90% for GGRW and 0.04% for ILCG.

ILCG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.82 vs 1.19), 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 GGRW 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