PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
ILCG vs. VOT
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

ILCG vs. VOT - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares Morningstar Growth ETF (ILCG) and Vanguard Mid-Cap Growth ETF (VOT). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ILCG achieves a 10.48% return, which is significantly higher than VOT's 5.49% return. Over the past 10 years, ILCG has outperformed VOT with an annualized return of 17.83%, while VOT has yielded a comparatively lower 11.95% annualized return.


ILCG

1D
0.76%
1M
0.01%
YTD
10.48%
6M
9.79%
1Y
24.11%
3Y*
25.09%
5Y*
14.03%
10Y*
17.83%

VOT

1D
0.12%
1M
1.80%
YTD
5.49%
6M
3.73%
1Y
7.75%
3Y*
15.09%
5Y*
6.19%
10Y*
11.95%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

ILCG vs. VOT - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
ILCG
iShares Morningstar Growth ETF
10.48%16.71%32.82%40.41%-31.75%24.33%38.56%33.22%2.06%30.57%
VOT
Vanguard Mid-Cap Growth ETF
5.49%10.72%16.38%23.10%-28.87%20.50%34.50%33.76%-5.56%21.80%

Correlation

The correlation between ILCG and VOT is 0.78, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.


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

0.78

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

0.80

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

0.88

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

0.88

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 28, 2006

0.90

The correlation between ILCG and VOT shifts across timeframes, from 0.78 (1 year) to 0.90 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

ILCG vs. VOT - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
ILCG
VOT

Technology

49.8%
28.9%

Communication Services

14.5%
3.8%

Consumer Cyclical

10.6%
13.9%

Industrials

8.3%
23.7%

Financial Services

6.0%
6.8%

Healthcare

5.3%
9.3%

Consumer Defensive

1.6%
0.8%

Real Estate

1.4%
4.8%

Basic Materials

1.1%
1.8%

Utilities

0.8%
3.5%

Energy

0.5%
2.7%

Technology

ILCG
49.8%
VOT
28.9%

Communication Services

ILCG
14.5%
VOT
3.8%

Consumer Cyclical

ILCG
10.6%
VOT
13.9%

Industrials

ILCG
8.3%
VOT
23.7%

Financial Services

ILCG
6.0%
VOT
6.8%

Healthcare

ILCG
5.3%
VOT
9.3%

Consumer Defensive

ILCG
1.6%
VOT
0.8%

Real Estate

ILCG
1.4%
VOT
4.8%

Basic Materials

ILCG
1.1%
VOT
1.8%

Utilities

ILCG
0.8%
VOT
3.5%

Energy

ILCG
0.5%
VOT
2.7%

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

ILCG vs. VOT — Risk / Return Rank

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

ILCG
ILCG Risk / Return Rank: 4141
Overall Rank
ILCG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4545
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ILCG Sortino Ratio Rank: 4343
Sortino Ratio Rank
ILCG Omega Ratio Rank: 4545
Omega Ratio Rank
ILCG Calmar Ratio Rank: 3434
Calmar Ratio Rank
ILCG Martin Ratio Rank: 3838
Martin Ratio Rank

VOT
VOT Risk / Return Rank: 1717
Overall Rank
VOT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1717
Sharpe Ratio Rank
VOT Sortino Ratio Rank: 1717
Sortino Ratio Rank
VOT Omega Ratio Rank: 1616
Omega Ratio Rank
VOT Calmar Ratio Rank: 1515
Calmar Ratio Rank
VOT Martin Ratio Rank: 1616
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.

ILCG vs. VOT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Morningstar Growth ETF (ILCG) and Vanguard Mid-Cap Growth ETF (VOT). 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.


ILCGVOTDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.96

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+1.17

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.26

1.09

+0.17

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.55

0.49

+1.06

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

5.43

1.46

+3.97

ILCG vs. VOT - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ILCG Sharpe Ratio is 1.44, which is higher than the VOT Sharpe Ratio of 0.48. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ILCG and VOT, 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


ILCGVOTDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.44

0.48

+0.96

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.64

0.29

+0.35

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.83

0.57

+0.26

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.58

0.44

+0.13

Drawdowns

ILCG vs. VOT - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ILCG drawdown since its inception was -52.98%, smaller than the maximum VOT drawdown of -60.16%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ILCG and VOT.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


ILCGVOTDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-52.98%

-60.16%

+7.18%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-15.65%

-15.96%

+0.31%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-23.10%

-21.77%

-1.33%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-35.38%

-37.19%

+1.81%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-35.38%

-37.19%

+1.81%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-4.48%

-3.48%

-1.00%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-8.22%

-9.96%

+1.74%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

4.45%

5.33%

-0.88%

Volatility

ILCG vs. VOT - Volatility Comparison

iShares Morningstar Growth ETF (ILCG) has a higher volatility of 6.01% compared to Vanguard Mid-Cap Growth ETF (VOT) at 5.45%. This indicates that ILCG's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than VOT based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


ILCGVOTDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

6.01%

5.45%

+0.56%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

13.55%

12.85%

+0.70%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

16.85%

16.20%

+0.65%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

22.08%

21.41%

+0.67%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

21.58%

21.02%

+0.56%

ILCG vs. VOT - Expense Ratio Comparison

ILCG has a 0.04% expense ratio, which is lower than VOT's 0.05% 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

ILCG vs. VOT - Dividend Comparison

ILCG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.42%, less than VOT's 0.63% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
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%
VOT
Vanguard Mid-Cap Growth ETF
0.63%0.64%0.67%0.71%0.78%0.34%0.56%0.78%0.84%0.72%0.81%0.81%

Frequently Asked Questions


ILCG and VOT have a correlation of 0.78, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

ILCG has higher volatility (6.01%) compared to VOT (5.45%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ILCG dropped -52.98% vs VOT's -60.16%.

On 10-year performance, ILCG leads with 17.83% vs 11.95% for VOT. On fees, ILCG is cheaper at 0.04% per year. On volatility, VOT has been the lower-risk option at 5.45%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, ILCG has performed better with a 17.83% return vs 11.95%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

ILCG is cheaper with a 0.04% expense ratio, compared with 0.05% for VOT.

VOT has the higher dividend yield at 0.63%, compared with 0.42% for ILCG.

ILCG is categorized as Large Cap Growth Equities, while VOT is Mid Cap Growth Equities. ILCG tracks Morningstar US Large-Mid Cap Broad Growth Index Gross, while VOT tracks CRSP US Mid Cap Growth Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Vanguard. Their fees differ too: 0.04% for ILCG and 0.05% for VOT.

ILCG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.44 vs 0.48), 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 ILCG and VOT

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