GRO.TO vs. MGRW.TO

Last updated Apr 1, 2026

Compare and contrast key facts about Franklin Growth ETF Portfolio (GRO.TO) and Mackenzie Growth Allocation ETF (MGRW.TO).

GRO.TO and MGRW.TO are both exchange-traded funds (ETFs), meaning they are traded on stock exchanges and can be bought and sold throughout the day. GRO.TO is an actively managed fund by Franklin Templeton. It was launched on Feb 20, 2019. MGRW.TO is an actively managed fund by Mackenzie. It was launched on Sep 29, 2020.

Performance

GRO.TO vs. MGRW.TO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in Franklin Growth ETF Portfolio (GRO.TO) and Mackenzie Growth Allocation ETF (MGRW.TO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

GRO.TO vs. MGRW.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
GRO.TO Franklin Growth ETF Portfolio	-2.38%	11.09%	15.17%
MGRW.TO Mackenzie Growth Allocation ETF	-2.32%	18.19%	11.50%

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both investments are quite close, with GRO.TO having a -2.38% return and MGRW.TO slightly higher at -2.32%.

GRO.TO

• 1D: 0.00%
• 1M: -5.81%
• YTD: -2.38%
• 6M: 0.01%
• 1Y: 13.17%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

MGRW.TO

• 1D: 0.12%
• 1M: -6.17%
• YTD: -2.32%
• 6M: 0.61%
• 1Y: 14.96%
• 3Y*: 15.18%
• 5Y*: 9.95%
• 10Y*: —

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

GRO.TO vs. MGRW.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison

GRO.TO

Franklin Growth ETF Portfolio

Return for Risk

GRO.TO vs. MGRW.TO — Risk / Return Rank

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

GRO.TO

GRO.TO Risk / Return Rank: 58
GRO.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 47
GRO.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 45
GRO.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 97
GRO.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 50
GRO.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 51

MGRW.TO

MGRW.TO Risk / Return Rank: 67
MGRW.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 73
MGRW.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 71
MGRW.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 73
MGRW.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 57
MGRW.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 63

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.

GRO.TO vs. MGRW.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Franklin Growth ETF Portfolio (GRO.TO) and Mackenzie Growth Allocation ETF (MGRW.TO). 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.

	GRO.TO	MGRW.TO	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	0.89	1.35	-0.46
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	1.29	1.85	-0.56
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.59	1.28	+0.31
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.34	1.50	-0.16
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	5.10	6.48	-1.38
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

GRO.TO vs. MGRW.TO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current GRO.TO Sharpe Ratio is 0.89, which is lower than the MGRW.TO Sharpe Ratio of 1.35. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of GRO.TO and MGRW.TO, offering insights into how both investments have performed under varying market conditions. These values are calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	GRO.TO	MGRW.TO	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.89	1.35	-0.46
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.96	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.06	1.08	-0.02

Correlation

The correlation between GRO.TO and MGRW.TO is 0.12, which is considered to be low. This implies their price changes are not closely related. A low correlation is generally favorable for portfolio diversification, as it helps to reduce overall risk by spreading it across multiple assets with different performance patterns.

Dividends

GRO.TO vs. MGRW.TO - Dividend Comparison

GRO.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.36%, more than MGRW.TO's 1.94% yield.

	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
GRO.TO Franklin Growth ETF Portfolio	2.36%	2.04%	1.50%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
MGRW.TO Mackenzie Growth Allocation ETF	1.94%	1.84%	1.93%	2.28%	2.44%	1.77%	0.79%

Drawdowns

GRO.TO vs. MGRW.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GRO.TO drawdown since its inception was -12.96%, smaller than the maximum MGRW.TO drawdown of -17.20%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GRO.TO and MGRW.TO.

Drawdown Indicators

	GRO.TO	MGRW.TO	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-12.96%	-17.20%	+4.24%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-9.16%	-9.38%	+0.22%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-17.20%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-5.81%	-6.60%	+0.79%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.36%	-3.45%	+2.09%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.41%	2.18%	+0.23%

Volatility

GRO.TO vs. MGRW.TO - Volatility Comparison

Franklin Growth ETF Portfolio (GRO.TO) has a higher volatility of 5.34% compared to Mackenzie Growth Allocation ETF (MGRW.TO) at 3.65%. This indicates that GRO.TO's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than MGRW.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	GRO.TO	MGRW.TO	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.34%	3.65%	+1.69%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	6.82%	7.07%	-0.25%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	14.93%	11.14%	+3.79%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	12.42%	10.43%	+1.99%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	12.42%	10.37%	+2.05%