PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
GRW vs. ACSI
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

GRW vs. ACSI - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in TCW Durable Growth ETF (GRW) and American Customer Satisfaction ETF (ACSI). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period


GRW

1D
-1.37%
1M
YTD
6M
1Y
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*

ACSI

1D
-0.70%
1M
1.41%
YTD
9.90%
6M
10.08%
1Y
20.25%
3Y*
17.89%
5Y*
9.08%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

GRW vs. ACSI - Yearly Performance Comparison


Correlation

The correlation between GRW and ACSI is 0.76, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.


Correlation
Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since May 28, 2026

0.76

GRW vs. ACSI - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
GRW
ACSI

Industrials

39.6%
7.3%

Technology

26.0%
12.5%

Financial Services

8.6%
9.6%

Communication Services

7.8%
15.4%

Consumer Cyclical

7.4%
24.2%

Basic Materials

3.8%

-

Healthcare

3.6%
8.5%

Consumer Defensive

-

12.4%

Energy

-

3.4%

Real Estate

-

-

Utilities

-

3.9%

Industrials

GRW
39.6%
ACSI
7.3%

Technology

GRW
26.0%
ACSI
12.5%

Financial Services

GRW
8.6%
ACSI
9.6%

Communication Services

GRW
7.8%
ACSI
15.4%

Consumer Cyclical

GRW
7.4%
ACSI
24.2%

Basic Materials

GRW
3.8%
ACSI

-

Healthcare

GRW
3.6%
ACSI
8.5%

Consumer Defensive

GRW

-

ACSI
12.4%

Energy

GRW

-

ACSI
3.4%

Real Estate

GRW

-

ACSI

-

Utilities

GRW

-

ACSI
3.9%

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

GRW vs. ACSI — Risk / Return Rank

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

GRW

Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.


ACSI
ACSI Risk / Return Rank: 5454
Overall Rank
ACSI Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5353
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ACSI Sortino Ratio Rank: 5353
Sortino Ratio Rank
ACSI Omega Ratio Rank: 5050
Omega Ratio Rank
ACSI Calmar Ratio Rank: 5555
Calmar Ratio Rank
ACSI Martin Ratio Rank: 5959
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.

GRW vs. ACSI - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for TCW Durable Growth ETF (GRW) and American Customer Satisfaction ETF (ACSI). 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.

Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.


GRWACSIDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.31

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.62

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

10.11

GRW vs. ACSI - Sharpe Ratio Comparison


Loading charts...

Drawdowns

GRW vs. ACSI - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GRW drawdown since its inception was -3.83%, smaller than the maximum ACSI drawdown of -34.49%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GRW and ACSI.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


GRWACSIDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-3.83%

-34.49%

+30.66%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-7.76%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-15.27%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-24.86%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.37%

-2.17%

+0.80%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-0.92%

-5.37%

+4.45%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.01%

Volatility

GRW vs. ACSI - Volatility Comparison


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


GRWACSIDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.07%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

9.12%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

19.32%

11.57%

+7.75%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

19.32%

16.68%

+2.64%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

19.32%

17.40%

+1.92%

GRW vs. ACSI - Expense Ratio Comparison

GRW has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is higher than ACSI's 0.66% expense ratio.


Dividends

GRW vs. ACSI - Dividend Comparison

GRW has not paid dividends to shareholders, while ACSI's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.83%.


PositionTTM2025202420232022202120202019201820172016
ACSI
American Customer Satisfaction ETF
0.83%0.91%0.69%1.01%0.81%0.31%0.82%1.64%1.59%1.20%0.18%
GRW
TCW Durable Growth ETF
0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


GRW and ACSI have a correlation of 0.76, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, ACSI is cheaper at 0.66% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

ACSI is cheaper with a 0.66% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for GRW.

ACSI has the higher dividend yield at 0.83%, compared with 0.00% for GRW.

They also come from different issuers: TCW and Exponential ETFs. Their fees differ too: 0.75% for GRW and 0.66% for ACSI.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for GRW and ACSI

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