ILCG vs. BELT

Last updated Aug 4, 2026

ILCG (iShares Morningstar Growth ETF) and BELT (iShares U.S. Select Equity Active ETF) are both Large Cap Growth Equities funds from iShares. ILCG is passively managed, while BELT is actively managed. Over the past year, ILCG returned 16.20% vs 21.30% for BELT. Their correlation of 0.90 means they have usually moved in the same direction. ILCG charges 0.04%/yr vs 0.75%/yr for BELT.

Performance

ILCG vs. BELT - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares Morningstar Growth ETF (ILCG) and iShares U.S. Select Equity Active ETF (BELT). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ILCG achieves a 9.70% return, which is significantly lower than BELT's 17.19% return.

ILCG

• 1D: 1.92%
• 1M: -0.14%
• 6M: 8.78%
• YTD: 9.70%
• 1Y: 16.20%
• 3Y*: 23.09%
• 5Y*: 11.74%
• 10Y*: 17.23%
• ALL TIME*: 11.61%

BELT

• 1D: 2.19%
• 1M: 0.34%
• 6M: 13.93%
• YTD: 17.19%
• 1Y: 21.30%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 12.85%

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
BELT iShares U.S. Select Equity Active ETF	$26.86K	$27.22K	$73.96K
ILCG iShares Morningstar Growth ETF	$5.71M	$6.91M	$9.84M

ILCG vs. BELT - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
ILCG iShares Morningstar Growth ETF	9.70%	16.71%	9.76%
BELT iShares U.S. Select Equity Active ETF	17.19%	12.42%	-1.87%

Correlation

The correlation between ILCG and BELT is 0.91, meaning they have usually moved in the same direction, including during past declines.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.91
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 18, 2024	0.90

The correlation between ILCG and BELT has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.90 to 0.91 - a consistent structural relationship.

ILCG vs. BELT - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	ILCG	BELT
Technology	54.1%	37.0%
Industrials	10.9%	27.2%
Communication Services	9.7%	12.5%
Consumer Cyclical	9.2%	11.1%
Healthcare	5.3%	0.4%
Financial Services	4.7%	12.3%
Consumer Defensive	1.6%	0.2%
Real Estate	1.5%	0.1%
Basic Materials	1.4%	0.1%
Utilities	0.9%	0.1%
Energy	0.7%	0.2%

Return for Risk

ILCG vs. BELT — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

ILCG

ILCG Risk / Return Rank: 33
ILCG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 35
ILCG Sortino Ratio Rank: 34
ILCG Omega Ratio Rank: 33
ILCG Calmar Ratio Rank: 31
ILCG Martin Ratio Rank: 34

BELT

BELT Risk / Return Rank: 44
BELT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 41
BELT Sortino Ratio Rank: 41
BELT Omega Ratio Rank: 39
BELT Calmar Ratio Rank: 47
BELT Martin Ratio Rank: 53

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

ILCG vs. BELT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Morningstar Growth ETF (ILCG) and iShares U.S. Select Equity Active ETF (BELT). 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.

	ILCG	BELT	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.87	1.11	-0.24
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.28	1.64	-0.36
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.16	1.20	-0.04
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.04	1.86	-0.83
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	3.30	6.67	-3.38

ILCG vs. BELT - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ILCG Sharpe Ratio is 0.87, which is comparable to the BELT Sharpe Ratio of 1.11. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ILCG and BELT, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

ILCG vs. BELT - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ILCG drawdown since its inception was -52.98%, which is greater than BELT's maximum drawdown of -23.05%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ILCG and BELT.

Drawdown Indicators

	ILCG	BELT	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-52.98%	-23.05%	-29.93%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-15.65%	-11.47%	-4.18%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-23.10%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-35.38%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-35.38%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-5.15%	-2.20%	-2.95%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-8.20%	-3.48%	-4.72%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.92%	3.20%	+1.72%

Volatility

ILCG vs. BELT - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares Morningstar Growth ETF (ILCG) is 6.33%, while iShares U.S. Select Equity Active ETF (BELT) has a volatility of 7.66%. This indicates that ILCG experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than BELT based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	ILCG	BELT	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.33%	7.66%	-1.33%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	15.61%	16.32%	-0.71%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	18.74%	19.27%	-0.53%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	22.39%	21.58%	+0.81%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	21.71%	21.58%	+0.13%

ILCG vs. BELT - Expense Ratio Comparison

ILCG has a 0.04% expense ratio, which is lower than BELT's 0.75% expense ratio.

Dividends

ILCG vs. BELT - Dividend Comparison

ILCG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.42%, more than BELT's 0.02% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
BELT iShares U.S. Select Equity Active ETF	0.02%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
ILCG iShares Morningstar Growth ETF	0.42%	0.47%	0.50%	0.69%	0.75%	0.34%	0.28%	0.54%	0.81%	0.89%	0.95%	0.99%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both ILCG and BELT in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.91, ILCG and BELT 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.

Which is riskier, ILCG or BELT?

BELT has higher volatility (7.66%) compared to ILCG (6.33%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ILCG dropped -52.98% vs BELT's -23.05%.

Which ETF is better, ILCG or BELT?

On 1-year performance, BELT leads with 21.30% vs 16.20% for ILCG. On fees, ILCG is cheaper at 0.04% per year. On volatility, ILCG has been the lower-risk option at 6.33%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, ILCG or BELT?

Over the 1-year period, BELT has performed better with a 21.30% return vs 16.20%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, ILCG or BELT?

ILCG is cheaper with a 0.04% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for BELT.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, ILCG or BELT?

ILCG has the higher dividend yield at 0.42%, compared with 0.02% for BELT.

What is the main difference between ILCG and BELT?

Their fees differ too: 0.04% for ILCG and 0.75% for BELT.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

BELT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.11 vs 0.87), 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.