GRW vs. NACP
GRW (TCW Durable Growth ETF) and NACP (Impact Shares NAACP Minority Empowerment ETF) are both Large Cap Growth Equities funds. GRW is actively managed, while NACP is passively managed. At a 0.30 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. GRW charges 0.75%/yr vs 0.49%/yr for NACP.
Performance
GRW vs. NACP - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
GRW
- 1D
- 0.18%
- 1M
- —
- YTD
- —
- 6M
- —
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
NACP
- 1D
- 0.14%
- 1M
- 8.57%
- YTD
- 22.35%
- 6M
- 21.44%
- 1Y
- 44.11%
- 3Y*
- 27.38%
- 5Y*
- 16.01%
- 10Y*
- —
GRW vs. NACP - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | |
|---|---|
GRW TCW Durable Growth ETF | 1.46% |
NACP Impact Shares NAACP Minority Empowerment ETF | 1.28% |
Correlation
The correlation between GRW and NACP is 0.30, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 29, 2026 | 0.30 |
GRW vs. NACP - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
GRW
NACP
Industrials
Technology
Financial Services
Communication Services
Consumer Cyclical
Healthcare
Basic Materials
Consumer Defensive
-
Energy
-
Real Estate
-
Utilities
-
Industrials
GRW
NACP
Technology
GRW
NACP
Financial Services
GRW
NACP
Communication Services
GRW
NACP
Consumer Cyclical
GRW
NACP
Healthcare
GRW
NACP
Basic Materials
GRW
NACP
Consumer Defensive
GRW
-
NACP
Energy
GRW
-
NACP
Real Estate
GRW
-
NACP
Utilities
GRW
-
NACP
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. NACP — Risk / Return Rank
GRW
NACP
GRW vs. NACP - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for TCW Durable Growth ETF (GRW) and Impact Shares NAACP Minority Empowerment ETF (NACP). 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.
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| GRW | NACP | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | — | 3.16 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | — | 0.92 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 13.58 | 0.93 | +12.65 |
Drawdowns
GRW vs. NACP - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum GRW drawdown since its inception was -0.45%, smaller than the maximum NACP drawdown of -30.96%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GRW and NACP.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| GRW | NACP | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -0.45% | -30.96% | +30.51% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | — | -9.65% | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -19.66% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -27.89% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.27% | 0.00% | -0.27% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -0.17% | -5.75% | +5.58% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | — | 2.19% | — |
Volatility
GRW vs. NACP - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| GRW | NACP | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | — | 4.34% | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | — | 11.13% | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 8.89% | 14.02% | -5.13% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 8.89% | 17.47% | -8.58% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 8.89% | 18.69% | -9.80% |
GRW vs. NACP - Expense Ratio Comparison
GRW has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is higher than NACP's 0.49% expense ratio.
Dividends
GRW vs. NACP - Dividend Comparison
GRW has not paid dividends to shareholders, while NACP's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.55%.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
GRW TCW Durable Growth ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
NACP Impact Shares NAACP Minority Empowerment ETF | 0.55% | 0.62% | 2.96% | 1.28% | 3.48% | 3.06% | 1.48% | 1.22% | 0.71% |
Frequently Asked Questions
GRW and NACP have a correlation of 0.30, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, NACP is cheaper at 0.49% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
NACP is cheaper with a 0.49% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for GRW.
NACP has the higher dividend yield at 0.55%, compared with 0.00% for GRW.
They also come from different issuers: TCW and Impact Shares. Their fees differ too: 0.75% for GRW and 0.49% for NACP.
Find the right allocation for GRW and NACP
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