PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
GSLC vs. LRGF
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

GSLC vs. LRGF

Last updated Jul 26, 2026
Documentation

GSLC (Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta U.S. Large Cap Equity ETF) and LRGF (iShares MSCI USA Multifactor ETF) are both Large Cap Blend Equities funds - GSLC tracks the Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta U.S. Large Cap Equity Index while LRGF tracks the MSCI USA Diversified Multi-Factor. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, GSLC returned 14.04%/yr vs 13.48%/yr for LRGF. Their 0.95 correlation means they have historically moved very closely together. GSLC charges 0.09%/yr vs 0.20%/yr for LRGF.

Performance

GSLC vs. LRGF - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta U.S. Large Cap Equity ETF (GSLC) and iShares MSCI USA Multifactor ETF (LRGF). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, GSLC achieves a 7.14% return, which is significantly lower than LRGF's 8.94% return. Both investments have delivered pretty close results over the past 10 years, with GSLC having a 14.04% annualized return and LRGF not far behind at 13.48%.

GSLC

1D
0.26%
1M
1.27%
6M
6.47%
YTD
7.14%
1Y
14.00%
3Y*
17.71%
5Y*
11.15%
10Y*
14.04%
ALL TIME*
13.91%

LRGF

1D
0.09%
1M
1.20%
6M
8.82%
YTD
8.94%
1Y
15.34%
3Y*
19.41%
5Y*
13.20%
10Y*
13.48%
ALL TIME*
12.23%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Liquidity Comparison

PositionAvg. Volume Value (2W)Avg. Volume Value (1M)Avg. Volume Value (3M)

GSLC

Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta U.S. Large Cap Equity ETF
$78.02M$62.36M$41.68M

LRGF

iShares MSCI USA Multifactor ETF
$11.35M$13.93M$11.55M

GSLC vs. LRGF - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
GSLC
Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta U.S. Large Cap Equity ETF		7.14%16.17%24.21%25.09%-18.71%27.17%19.02%30.74%-4.07%22.49%
LRGF
iShares MSCI USA Multifactor ETF		8.94%16.48%26.59%25.85%-14.77%25.01%11.11%26.11%-9.66%21.13%

Correlation

The correlation between GSLC and LRGF is 0.99 - they have historically moved very closely together. At this level, their price movements offset little of one another.

Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.

0.99

Correlation (3Y)
Balances recent behavior with more history.

0.99

Correlation (5Y)
Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period.

0.99

Correlation (10Y)
Provides a long-term view across more market conditions.

0.96

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 21, 2015

0.95

The correlation between GSLC and LRGF has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.95 to 0.99 - a consistent structural relationship.

GSLC vs. LRGF - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
GSLC
LRGF

Technology

37.8%
37.3%

Financial Services

10.9%
11.7%

Consumer Cyclical

10.3%
10.5%

Communication Services

10.2%
10.0%

Healthcare

9.1%
9.4%

Industrials

8.5%
8.3%

Consumer Defensive

5.5%
4.9%

Energy

2.9%
3.1%

Utilities

2.2%
2.0%

Basic Materials

1.4%
1.8%

Real Estate

1.2%
1.1%

Technology

GSLC
37.8%
LRGF
37.3%

Financial Services

GSLC
10.9%
LRGF
11.7%

Consumer Cyclical

GSLC
10.3%
LRGF
10.5%

Communication Services

GSLC
10.2%
LRGF
10.0%

Healthcare

GSLC
9.1%
LRGF
9.4%

Industrials

GSLC
8.5%
LRGF
8.3%

Consumer Defensive

GSLC
5.5%
LRGF
4.9%

Energy

GSLC
2.9%
LRGF
3.1%

Utilities

GSLC
2.2%
LRGF
2.0%

Basic Materials

GSLC
1.4%
LRGF
1.8%

Real Estate

GSLC
1.2%
LRGF
1.1%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.

Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta U.S. Large Cap Equity ETF

iShares MSCI USA Multifactor ETF

Often compared with GSLC:
GSLC vs. VOOGSLC vs. SPYGSLC vs. GSUSGSLC vs. VTIGSLC vs. VLUEGSLC vs. BFFAXGSLC vs. QUAL
Often compared with LRGF:
LRGF vs. VOOLRGF vs. QUALLRGF vs. INTFLRGF vs. SPYLRGF vs. FNDALRGF vs. VVLRGF vs. JQUA

Return for Risk

GSLC vs. LRGF — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
GSLC
GSLC Risk / Return Rank: 4848
Overall Rank
GSLC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4949
Sharpe Ratio Rank
GSLC Sortino Ratio Rank: 4747
Sortino Ratio Rank
GSLC Omega Ratio Rank: 4747
Omega Ratio Rank
GSLC Calmar Ratio Rank: 4444
Calmar Ratio Rank
GSLC Martin Ratio Rank: 5555
Martin Ratio Rank
LRGF
LRGF Risk / Return Rank: 5252
Overall Rank
LRGF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5252
Sharpe Ratio Rank
LRGF Sortino Ratio Rank: 5151
Sortino Ratio Rank
LRGF Omega Ratio Rank: 5050
Omega Ratio Rank
LRGF Calmar Ratio Rank: 5151
Calmar Ratio Rank
LRGF 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.

GSLC vs. LRGF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta U.S. Large Cap Equity ETF (GSLC) and iShares MSCI USA Multifactor ETF (LRGF). 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.

GSLCLRGFDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
1.18
1.25

-0.07

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
1.68
1.77

-0.09

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.21

1.22

-0.01

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.54

1.78

-0.24

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

6.49

6.95

-0.46

GSLC vs. LRGF - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current GSLC Sharpe Ratio is 1.18, which is comparable to the LRGF Sharpe Ratio of 1.25. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of GSLC and LRGF, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Loading charts...

Drawdowns

GSLC vs. LRGF - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GSLC drawdown since its inception was -33.69%, smaller than the maximum LRGF drawdown of -36.03%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GSLC and LRGF.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

GSLCLRGFDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-33.69%

-36.03%

+2.34%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-9.49%

-8.92%

-0.57%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-18.66%

-19.44%

+0.78%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-24.90%

-21.62%

-3.28%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-33.69%

-36.03%

+2.34%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.91%

-2.11%

+0.20%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-4.36%

-4.51%

+0.15%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.24%

2.28%

-0.04%

Volatility

GSLC vs. LRGF - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta U.S. Large Cap Equity ETF (GSLC) is 2.67%, while iShares MSCI USA Multifactor ETF (LRGF) has a volatility of 2.90%. This indicates that GSLC experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than LRGF based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

GSLCLRGFDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

2.67%

2.90%

-0.23%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

9.52%

9.83%

-0.31%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

12.31%

12.69%

-0.38%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

16.69%

17.07%

-0.38%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

17.67%

18.28%

-0.61%

GSLC vs. LRGF - Expense Ratio Comparison

GSLC has a 0.09% expense ratio, which is lower than LRGF's 0.20% expense ratio. Despite the difference, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.

Dividends

GSLC vs. LRGF - Dividend Comparison

GSLC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.95%, less than LRGF's 1.09% yield.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
GSLC
Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta U.S. Large Cap Equity ETF		0.95%1.00%1.11%1.38%1.61%1.06%1.35%1.54%1.89%1.69%1.69%0.36%
LRGF
iShares MSCI USA Multifactor ETF		1.09%1.16%1.23%1.49%1.78%1.05%1.35%1.76%3.27%1.68%1.56%0.83%

Frequently Asked Questions

With a correlation of 0.99, GSLC and LRGF move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

LRGF has higher volatility (2.90%) compared to GSLC (2.67%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GSLC dropped -33.69% vs LRGF's -36.03%.

On 10-year performance, GSLC leads with 14.04% vs 13.48% for LRGF. On fees, GSLC is cheaper at 0.09% per year. On volatility, GSLC has been the lower-risk option at 2.67%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, GSLC has performed better with a 14.04% return vs 13.48%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

GSLC is cheaper with a 0.09% expense ratio, compared with 0.20% for LRGF.

LRGF has the higher dividend yield at 1.09%, compared with 0.95% for GSLC.

GSLC tracks Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta U.S. Large Cap Equity Index, while LRGF tracks MSCI USA Diversified Multi-Factor. They also come from different issuers: Goldman Sachs and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.09% for GSLC and 0.20% for LRGF.

LRGF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.25 vs 1.18), meaning it's delivered slightly more return per unit of risk over the trailing 12 months. However, this ranking shifts over time - use the Risk/Return Score above for a more comprehensive view that combines Sharpe, Sortino, and other measures used by quantitative funds.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for GSLC and LRGF

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