GRW vs. OUSA
GRW (TCW Durable Growth ETF) and OUSA (OShares U.S. Quality Dividend ETF) are both Large Cap Growth Equities funds. GRW is actively managed, while OUSA is passively managed. At a 0.20 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. GRW charges 0.75%/yr vs 0.48%/yr for OUSA.
Performance
GRW vs. OUSA - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
GRW
- 1D
- 0.18%
- 1M
- —
- YTD
- —
- 6M
- —
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
OUSA
- 1D
- 1.12%
- 1M
- 1.77%
- YTD
- 2.19%
- 6M
- 2.97%
- 1Y
- 11.02%
- 3Y*
- 13.17%
- 5Y*
- 8.87%
- 10Y*
- 10.30%
GRW vs. OUSA - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | |
|---|---|
GRW TCW Durable Growth ETF | 1.46% |
OUSA OShares U.S. Quality Dividend ETF | -0.63% |
Correlation
The correlation between GRW and OUSA is 0.20, 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 | 0.20 |
GRW vs. OUSA - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
GRW
OUSA
Industrials
Technology
Financial Services
Communication Services
Consumer Cyclical
Healthcare
Basic Materials
-
Consumer Defensive
-
Energy
-
-
Real Estate
-
-
Utilities
-
-
Industrials
GRW
OUSA
Technology
GRW
OUSA
Financial Services
GRW
OUSA
Communication Services
GRW
OUSA
Consumer Cyclical
GRW
OUSA
Healthcare
GRW
OUSA
Basic Materials
GRW
OUSA
-
Consumer Defensive
GRW
-
OUSA
Energy
GRW
-
OUSA
-
Real Estate
GRW
-
OUSA
-
Utilities
GRW
-
OUSA
-
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. OUSA — Risk / Return Rank
GRW
OUSA
GRW vs. OUSA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for TCW Durable Growth ETF (GRW) and OShares U.S. Quality Dividend ETF (OUSA). 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 | OUSA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | — | 1.13 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | — | 0.67 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | — | 0.68 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 13.58 | 0.69 | +12.89 |
Drawdowns
GRW vs. OUSA - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum GRW drawdown since its inception was -0.45%, smaller than the maximum OUSA drawdown of -33.12%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GRW and OUSA.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| GRW | OUSA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -0.45% | -33.12% | +32.67% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | — | -8.36% | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -13.14% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -19.54% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -33.12% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.27% | -1.49% | +1.22% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -0.17% | -3.53% | +3.36% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | — | 2.35% | — |
Volatility
GRW vs. OUSA - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| GRW | OUSA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | — | 2.48% | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | — | 7.27% | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 8.89% | 9.80% | -0.91% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 8.89% | 13.31% | -4.42% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 8.89% | 15.16% | -6.27% |
GRW vs. OUSA - Expense Ratio Comparison
GRW has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is higher than OUSA's 0.48% expense ratio.
Dividends
GRW vs. OUSA - Dividend Comparison
GRW has not paid dividends to shareholders, while OUSA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.41%.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
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% | 0.00% |
OUSA OShares U.S. Quality Dividend ETF | 1.41% | 1.39% | 1.50% | 1.81% | 1.92% | 1.56% | 2.03% | 2.31% | 3.06% | 2.15% | 2.32% | 1.17% |
Frequently Asked Questions
GRW and OUSA have a correlation of 0.20, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, OUSA is cheaper at 0.48% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
OUSA is cheaper with a 0.48% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for GRW.
OUSA has the higher dividend yield at 1.41%, compared with 0.00% for GRW.
They also come from different issuers: TCW and O'Shares Investments. Their fees differ too: 0.75% for GRW and 0.48% for OUSA.
Find the right allocation for GRW and OUSA
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