PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
GTLLX vs. GTLOX
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

GTLLX vs. GTLOX - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Glenmede Quantitative U.S. Large Cap Growth Equity Portfolio (GTLLX) and Glenmede Quantitative U.S. Large Cap Core Equity Portfolio (GTLOX). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both investments are quite close, with GTLLX having a 20.44% return and GTLOX slightly higher at 20.77%. Over the past 10 years, GTLLX has outperformed GTLOX with an annualized return of 16.55%, while GTLOX has yielded a comparatively lower 12.55% annualized return.


GTLLX

1D
2.71%
1M
12.23%
YTD
20.44%
6M
21.70%
1Y
39.37%
3Y*
25.44%
5Y*
14.81%
10Y*
16.55%

GTLOX

1D
1.75%
1M
7.79%
YTD
20.77%
6M
23.85%
1Y
41.37%
3Y*
20.53%
5Y*
10.92%
10Y*
12.55%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

GTLLX vs. GTLOX - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
GTLLX
Glenmede Quantitative U.S. Large Cap Growth Equity Portfolio
20.44%17.44%20.71%27.10%-21.69%32.91%18.80%34.86%-5.23%27.83%
GTLOX
Glenmede Quantitative U.S. Large Cap Core Equity Portfolio
20.77%14.39%13.86%16.66%-15.37%27.05%7.41%23.27%-7.97%24.78%

Correlation

The correlation between GTLLX and GTLOX is 0.88, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.88

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.88

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.91

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.92

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 4, 2005

0.95

The correlation between GTLLX and GTLOX has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.88 to 0.95 - a consistent structural relationship.

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

GTLLX vs. GTLOX — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

GTLLX
GTLLX Risk / Return Rank: 6767
Overall Rank
GTLLX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6767
Sharpe Ratio Rank
GTLLX Sortino Ratio Rank: 5959
Sortino Ratio Rank
GTLLX Omega Ratio Rank: 5353
Omega Ratio Rank
GTLLX Calmar Ratio Rank: 7979
Calmar Ratio Rank
GTLLX Martin Ratio Rank: 7979
Martin Ratio Rank

GTLOX
GTLOX Risk / Return Rank: 9090
Overall Rank
GTLOX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9191
Sharpe Ratio Rank
GTLOX Sortino Ratio Rank: 8787
Sortino Ratio Rank
GTLOX Omega Ratio Rank: 8080
Omega Ratio Rank
GTLOX Calmar Ratio Rank: 9494
Calmar Ratio Rank
GTLOX Martin Ratio Rank: 9696
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.

GTLLX vs. GTLOX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Glenmede Quantitative U.S. Large Cap Growth Equity Portfolio (GTLLX) and Glenmede Quantitative U.S. Large Cap Core Equity Portfolio (GTLOX). 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.


GTLLXGTLOXDifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

2.40

3.05

-0.66

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

3.24

4.15

-0.91

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

1.40

1.53

-0.13

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

3.58

5.38

-1.79

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

14.79

23.26

-8.46

GTLLX vs. GTLOX - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current GTLLX Sharpe Ratio is 2.40, which is comparable to the GTLOX Sharpe Ratio of 3.05. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of GTLLX and GTLOX, 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...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


GTLLXGTLOXDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.40

3.05

-0.66

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.51

0.50

+0.01

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.66

0.60

+0.06

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.55

0.50

+0.05

Drawdowns

GTLLX vs. GTLOX - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GTLLX drawdown since its inception was -54.32%, roughly equal to the maximum GTLOX drawdown of -54.09%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GTLLX and GTLOX.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


GTLLXGTLOXDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-54.32%

-54.09%

-0.23%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-10.76%

-7.47%

-3.29%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-41.54%

-32.85%

-8.69%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-41.54%

-32.85%

-8.69%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-41.54%

-38.15%

-3.39%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.82%

0.00%

-0.82%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-8.58%

-8.33%

-0.25%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.61%

1.73%

+0.88%

Volatility

GTLLX vs. GTLOX - Volatility Comparison

Glenmede Quantitative U.S. Large Cap Growth Equity Portfolio (GTLLX) has a higher volatility of 4.99% compared to Glenmede Quantitative U.S. Large Cap Core Equity Portfolio (GTLOX) at 4.16%. This indicates that GTLLX's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than GTLOX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


GTLLXGTLOXDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.99%

4.16%

+0.83%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

13.30%

10.30%

+3.00%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

17.00%

13.85%

+3.15%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

28.99%

21.85%

+7.14%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

25.00%

20.91%

+4.09%

GTLLX vs. GTLOX - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both GTLLX and GTLOX have an expense ratio of 0.85%.


Dividends

GTLLX vs. GTLOX - Dividend Comparison

GTLLX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 12.73%, less than GTLOX's 14.82% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
GTLLX
Glenmede Quantitative U.S. Large Cap Growth Equity Portfolio
12.73%15.33%40.42%4.91%7.93%20.20%15.12%14.10%16.97%2.29%0.58%0.61%
GTLOX
Glenmede Quantitative U.S. Large Cap Core Equity Portfolio
14.82%17.84%25.96%8.32%23.58%13.35%9.06%5.35%10.53%4.99%1.08%2.09%

Frequently Asked Questions


GTLLX and GTLOX have a correlation of 0.88, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

GTLLX has higher volatility (4.99%) compared to GTLOX (4.16%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GTLLX dropped -54.32% vs GTLOX's -54.09%.

GTLOX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.05 vs 2.40), 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 GTLLX and GTLOX

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