ILCV vs. ROE

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

ILCV (iShares Morningstar Value ETF) and ROE (Astoria US Equal Weight Quality Kings ETF) are both Large Cap Value Equities funds. ILCV is passively managed, while ROE is actively managed. Over the past year, ILCV returned 26.58% vs 37.99% for ROE. Their correlation of 0.87 suggests significant overlap in exposure. ILCV charges 0.04%/yr vs 0.49%/yr for ROE.

Performance

ILCV vs. ROE - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares Morningstar Value ETF (ILCV) and Astoria US Equal Weight Quality Kings ETF (ROE). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ILCV achieves a 7.75% return, which is significantly lower than ROE's 20.98% return.

ILCV

• 1D: -0.44%
• 1M: 2.76%
• YTD: 7.75%
• 6M: 7.41%
• 1Y: 26.58%
• 3Y*: 18.61%
• 5Y*: 11.42%
• 10Y*: 11.68%

ROE

• 1D: -0.04%
• 1M: 8.10%
• YTD: 20.98%
• 6M: 21.56%
• 1Y: 37.99%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

ILCV vs. ROE - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
ILCV iShares Morningstar Value ETF	7.75%	18.79%	17.03%	3.74%
ROE Astoria US Equal Weight Quality Kings ETF	20.98%	17.20%	18.34%	4.29%

Correlation

The correlation between ILCV and ROE is 0.80, 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	0.80
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 2, 2023	0.87

The correlation between ILCV and ROE has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.80 to 0.87 - a consistent structural relationship.

ILCV vs. ROE - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	ILCV	ROE
Technology	23.8%	36.1%
Financial Services	16.5%	11.7%
Healthcare	11.5%	8.7%
Consumer Cyclical	9.5%	9.4%
Industrials	8.8%	9.8%
Communication Services	8.0%	10.6%
Consumer Defensive	7.6%	4.7%
Energy	6.0%	3.5%
Utilities	3.5%	1.9%
Basic Materials	2.4%	1.8%
Real Estate	2.0%	1.9%

Return for Risk

ILCV vs. ROE — Risk / Return Rank

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

ILCV

ILCV Risk / Return Rank: 82
ILCV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 82
ILCV Sortino Ratio Rank: 84
ILCV Omega Ratio Rank: 81
ILCV Calmar Ratio Rank: 79
ILCV Martin Ratio Rank: 83

ROE

ROE Risk / Return Rank: 83
ROE Sharpe Ratio Rank: 84
ROE Sortino Ratio Rank: 82
ROE Omega Ratio Rank: 80
ROE Calmar Ratio Rank: 83
ROE Martin Ratio Rank: 89

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.

ILCV vs. ROE - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Morningstar Value ETF (ILCV) and Astoria US Equal Weight Quality Kings ETF (ROE). 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.

	ILCV	ROE	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.72	2.74	-0.02
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.85	3.69	+0.16
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.50	1.48	+0.02
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.08	4.41	-0.33
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	16.87	19.92	-3.05
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

ILCV vs. ROE - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ILCV Sharpe Ratio is 2.72, which is comparable to the ROE Sharpe Ratio of 2.74. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ILCV and ROE, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	ILCV	ROE	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.72	2.74	-0.02
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.81	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.70	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.46	1.39	-0.93

Drawdowns

ILCV vs. ROE - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ILCV drawdown since its inception was -58.63%, which is greater than ROE's maximum drawdown of -19.10%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ILCV and ROE.

Drawdown Indicators

	ILCV	ROE	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-58.63%	-19.10%	-39.53%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-6.55%	-8.66%	+2.11%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-14.95%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-18.58%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-35.53%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.60%	-0.04%	-0.56%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-9.32%	-2.59%	-6.73%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.58%	1.91%	-0.33%

Volatility

ILCV vs. ROE - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares Morningstar Value ETF (ILCV) is 2.01%, while Astoria US Equal Weight Quality Kings ETF (ROE) has a volatility of 3.79%. This indicates that ILCV experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than ROE based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	ILCV	ROE	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.01%	3.79%	-1.78%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	6.97%	10.66%	-3.69%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	9.82%	13.94%	-4.12%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	14.21%	15.78%	-1.57%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	16.66%	15.78%	+0.88%

ILCV vs. ROE - Expense Ratio Comparison

ILCV has a 0.04% expense ratio, which is lower than ROE's 0.49% expense ratio.

Dividends

ILCV vs. ROE - Dividend Comparison

ILCV's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.63%, more than ROE's 0.94% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
ILCV iShares Morningstar Value ETF	1.63%	1.77%	1.99%	2.27%	2.32%	2.01%	2.96%	2.70%	2.93%	2.32%	2.76%	3.01%
ROE Astoria US Equal Weight Quality Kings ETF	0.94%	0.97%	1.18%	0.68%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both ILCV and ROE in my portfolio?

ILCV and ROE have a correlation of 0.80, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, ILCV or ROE?

ROE has higher volatility (3.79%) compared to ILCV (2.01%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ILCV dropped -58.63% vs ROE's -19.10%.

Which ETF is better, ILCV or ROE?

On 1-year performance, ROE leads with 37.99% vs 26.58% for ILCV. On fees, ILCV is cheaper at 0.04% per year. On volatility, ILCV has been the lower-risk option at 2.01%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, ILCV or ROE?

Over the 1-year period, ROE has performed better with a 37.99% return vs 26.58%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, ILCV or ROE?

ILCV is cheaper with a 0.04% expense ratio, compared with 0.49% for ROE.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, ILCV or ROE?

ILCV has the higher dividend yield at 1.63%, compared with 0.94% for ROE.

What is the main difference between ILCV and ROE?

They also come from different issuers: iShares and Astoria. Their fees differ too: 0.04% for ILCV and 0.49% for ROE.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

ROE currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.74 vs 2.72), 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.