GRW vs. MUSE
GRW (TCW Durable Growth ETF) and MUSE (TCW Multisector Credit Income ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - GRW is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund actively managed by TCW, while MUSE is a Multisector Bonds fund actively managed by TCW. Both are actively managed. Their 0.57 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. GRW charges 0.75%/yr vs 0.56%/yr for MUSE.
Performance
GRW vs. MUSE - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
GRW
- 1D
- 1.13%
- 1M
- -1.32%
- 6M
- —
- YTD
- —
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- —
MUSE
- 1D
- 0.00%
- 1M
- -0.22%
- 6M
- 1.50%
- YTD
- 2.47%
- 1Y
- 5.92%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- 6.51%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $173.33K | $124.39K | $212.92K | |
| $5.03K | $2.86K | $16.74K |
GRW vs. MUSE - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | |
|---|---|
GRW TCW Durable Growth ETF | 2.98% |
MUSE TCW Multisector Credit Income ETF | 0.46% |
Correlation
The correlation between GRW and MUSE is 0.57, which is moderate. They have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently, sharing some price drivers without tracking each other closely.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 28, 2026 | 0.57 |
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. MUSE — Risk / Return Rank
GRW
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
MUSE
GRW vs. MUSE - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for TCW Durable Growth ETF (GRW) and TCW Multisector Credit Income ETF (MUSE). 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.
| GRW | MUSE | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | — | 1.46 | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | — | 2.32 | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | — | 8.58 | — |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
GRW vs. MUSE - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum GRW drawdown since its inception was -4.12%, which is greater than MUSE's maximum drawdown of -3.63%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GRW and MUSE.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| GRW | MUSE | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -4.12% | -3.63% | -0.49% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | — | -2.54% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -1.85% | -0.43% | -1.42% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -1.73% | -0.40% | -1.33% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | — | 0.69% | — |
Volatility
GRW vs. MUSE - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| GRW | MUSE | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | — | 0.49% | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | — | 2.45% | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 15.72% | 2.81% | +12.91% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 15.72% | 3.73% | +11.99% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 15.72% | 3.73% | +11.99% |
GRW vs. MUSE - Expense Ratio Comparison
GRW has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is higher than MUSE's 0.56% expense ratio.
Dividends
GRW vs. MUSE - Dividend Comparison
GRW has not paid dividends to shareholders, while MUSE's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 7.74%.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 |
|---|---|---|---|
GRW TCW Durable Growth ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
MUSE TCW Multisector Credit Income ETF | 7.13% | 7.35% | 0.75% |
Frequently Asked Questions
GRW and MUSE have a correlation of 0.57, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, MUSE is cheaper at 0.56% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
MUSE is cheaper with a 0.56% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for GRW.
MUSE has the higher dividend yield at 7.13%, compared with 0.00% for GRW.
GRW is categorized as Large Cap Growth Equities, while MUSE is Multisector Bonds. Their fees differ too: 0.75% for GRW and 0.56% for MUSE.
Find the right allocation for GRW and MUSE
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