GRW vs. ROUS
GRW (TCW Durable Growth ETF) and ROUS (Hartford Multifactor US Equity ETF) are both Large Cap Growth Equities funds. GRW is actively managed, while ROUS is passively managed. A 0.50 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. GRW charges 0.75%/yr vs 0.19%/yr for ROUS.
Performance
GRW vs. ROUS - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
GRW
- 1D
- 0.18%
- 1M
- —
- YTD
- —
- 6M
- —
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
ROUS
- 1D
- 0.03%
- 1M
- 5.16%
- YTD
- 16.59%
- 6M
- 16.42%
- 1Y
- 29.90%
- 3Y*
- 21.07%
- 5Y*
- 12.84%
- 10Y*
- 12.98%
GRW vs. ROUS - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | |
|---|---|
GRW TCW Durable Growth ETF | 1.46% |
ROUS Hartford Multifactor US Equity ETF | 1.59% |
Correlation
The correlation between GRW and ROUS is 0.50, 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 29, 2026 | 0.50 |
GRW vs. ROUS - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
GRW
ROUS
Industrials
Technology
Financial Services
Communication Services
Consumer Cyclical
Healthcare
Basic Materials
Consumer Defensive
-
Energy
-
Real Estate
-
Utilities
-
Industrials
GRW
ROUS
Technology
GRW
ROUS
Financial Services
GRW
ROUS
Communication Services
GRW
ROUS
Consumer Cyclical
GRW
ROUS
Healthcare
GRW
ROUS
Basic Materials
GRW
ROUS
Consumer Defensive
GRW
-
ROUS
Energy
GRW
-
ROUS
Real Estate
GRW
-
ROUS
Utilities
GRW
-
ROUS
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. ROUS — Risk / Return Rank
GRW
ROUS
GRW vs. ROUS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for TCW Durable Growth ETF (GRW) and Hartford Multifactor US Equity ETF (ROUS). 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 | ROUS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | — | 2.65 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | — | 0.90 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | — | 0.77 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 13.58 | 0.67 | +12.91 |
Drawdowns
GRW vs. ROUS - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum GRW drawdown since its inception was -0.45%, smaller than the maximum ROUS drawdown of -35.51%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GRW and ROUS.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| GRW | ROUS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -0.45% | -35.51% | +35.06% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | — | -5.97% | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -15.81% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -18.91% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -35.51% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.27% | 0.00% | -0.27% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -0.17% | -4.24% | +4.07% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | — | 1.45% | — |
Volatility
GRW vs. ROUS - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| GRW | ROUS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | — | 2.44% | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | — | 8.50% | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 8.89% | 11.36% | -2.47% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 8.89% | 14.37% | -5.48% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 8.89% | 16.95% | -8.06% |
GRW vs. ROUS - Expense Ratio Comparison
GRW has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is higher than ROUS's 0.19% expense ratio.
Dividends
GRW vs. ROUS - Dividend Comparison
GRW has not paid dividends to shareholders, while ROUS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.32%.
| 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% |
ROUS Hartford Multifactor US Equity ETF | 1.32% | 1.52% | 1.62% | 1.91% | 1.88% | 1.38% | 2.01% | 2.12% | 1.89% | 1.54% | 1.97% | 1.62% |
Frequently Asked Questions
GRW and ROUS have a correlation of 0.50, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, ROUS is cheaper at 0.19% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
ROUS is cheaper with a 0.19% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for GRW.
ROUS has the higher dividend yield at 1.32%, compared with 0.00% for GRW.
They also come from different issuers: TCW and Hartford. Their fees differ too: 0.75% for GRW and 0.19% for ROUS.
Find the right allocation for GRW and ROUS
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