IMCG vs. FAD
IMCG (iShares Morningstar Mid-Cap Growth ETF) and FAD (First Trust Multi Cap Growth AlphaDEX Fund) are both Mid Cap Growth Equities funds - IMCG tracks the Morningstar US Mid Cap Broad Growth Index while FAD tracks the NASDAQ AlphaDEX Multi Cap Growth Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, IMCG returned 14.46%/yr vs 14.53%/yr for FAD. Their correlation of 0.87 suggests significant overlap in exposure. IMCG charges 0.06%/yr vs 0.63%/yr for FAD.
Performance
IMCG vs. FAD - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, IMCG achieves a 20.05% return, which is significantly higher than FAD's 17.25% return. Both investments have delivered pretty close results over the past 10 years, with IMCG having a 14.46% annualized return and FAD not far ahead at 14.53%.
IMCG
- 1D
- -0.26%
- 1M
- 8.33%
- YTD
- 20.05%
- 6M
- 18.28%
- 1Y
- 23.35%
- 3Y*
- 18.91%
- 5Y*
- 8.62%
- 10Y*
- 14.46%
FAD
- 1D
- -0.15%
- 1M
- 6.70%
- YTD
- 17.25%
- 6M
- 17.16%
- 1Y
- 34.52%
- 3Y*
- 24.16%
- 5Y*
- 11.25%
- 10Y*
- 14.53%
IMCG vs. FAD - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
IMCG iShares Morningstar Mid-Cap Growth ETF | 20.05% | 6.55% | 18.14% | 20.73% | -25.79% | 15.39% | 45.64% | 35.70% | -3.68% | 25.57% |
FAD First Trust Multi Cap Growth AlphaDEX Fund | 17.25% | 17.23% | 23.85% | 19.07% | -24.06% | 21.17% | 34.92% | 26.66% | -6.45% | 25.75% |
Correlation
The correlation between IMCG and FAD is 0.93, 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 | 0.93 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.95 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.94 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.94 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 14, 2007 | 0.87 |
The correlation between IMCG and FAD has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.87 to 0.95 - a consistent structural relationship.
IMCG vs. FAD - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
IMCG
FAD
Technology
Industrials
Consumer Cyclical
Financial Services
Healthcare
Basic Materials
Real Estate
Utilities
Communication Services
Energy
Consumer Defensive
Technology
IMCG
FAD
Industrials
IMCG
FAD
Consumer Cyclical
IMCG
FAD
Financial Services
IMCG
FAD
Healthcare
IMCG
FAD
Basic Materials
IMCG
FAD
Real Estate
IMCG
FAD
Utilities
IMCG
FAD
Communication Services
IMCG
FAD
Energy
IMCG
FAD
Consumer Defensive
IMCG
FAD
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
IMCG vs. FAD — Risk / Return Rank
IMCG
FAD
IMCG vs. FAD - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Morningstar Mid-Cap Growth ETF (IMCG) and First Trust Multi Cap Growth AlphaDEX Fund (FAD). 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.
| IMCG | FAD | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | 1.51 | 1.88 | -0.36 |
Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | 2.18 | 2.59 | -0.41 |
Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.26 | 1.32 | -0.06 |
Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.31 | 3.25 | -0.94 |
Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 8.97 | 12.54 | -3.57 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| IMCG | FAD | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.51 | 1.88 | -0.36 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.43 | 0.55 | -0.12 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.71 | 0.69 | +0.02 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.54 | 0.50 | +0.04 |
Drawdowns
IMCG vs. FAD - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum IMCG drawdown since its inception was -58.96%, which is greater than FAD's maximum drawdown of -54.33%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IMCG and FAD.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| IMCG | FAD | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -58.96% | -54.33% | -4.63% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -10.17% | -10.66% | +0.49% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -21.92% | -23.55% | +1.63% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -35.08% | -31.99% | -3.09% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -35.08% | -37.25% | +2.17% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.26% | -0.15% | -0.11% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -9.22% | -9.64% | +0.42% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.61% | 2.76% | -0.15% |
Volatility
IMCG vs. FAD - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for iShares Morningstar Mid-Cap Growth ETF (IMCG) is 4.65%, while First Trust Multi Cap Growth AlphaDEX Fund (FAD) has a volatility of 6.01%. This indicates that IMCG experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FAD based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| IMCG | FAD | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 4.65% | 6.01% | -1.36% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 12.53% | 14.14% | -1.61% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 15.53% | 18.50% | -2.97% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 20.17% | 20.53% | -0.36% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 20.51% | 21.18% | -0.67% |
IMCG vs. FAD - Expense Ratio Comparison
IMCG has a 0.06% expense ratio, which is lower than FAD's 0.63% expense ratio.
Dividends
IMCG vs. FAD - Dividend Comparison
IMCG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.65%, more than FAD's 0.09% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FAD First Trust Multi Cap Growth AlphaDEX Fund | 0.09% | 0.09% | 0.59% | 0.51% | 0.60% | 0.09% | 0.32% | 0.48% | 0.20% | 0.22% | 0.64% | 0.41% |
IMCG iShares Morningstar Mid-Cap Growth ETF | 0.65% | 0.78% | 0.78% | 0.85% | 0.91% | 0.41% | 0.09% | 0.30% | 0.35% | 0.45% | 0.52% | 0.38% |
Frequently Asked Questions
With a correlation of 0.93, IMCG and FAD 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.
FAD has higher volatility (6.01%) compared to IMCG (4.65%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IMCG dropped -58.96% vs FAD's -54.33%.
On 10-year performance, FAD leads with 14.53% vs 14.46% for IMCG. On fees, IMCG is cheaper at 0.06% per year. On volatility, IMCG has been the lower-risk option at 4.65%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 10-year period, FAD has performed better with a 14.53% return vs 14.46%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
IMCG is cheaper with a 0.06% expense ratio, compared with 0.63% for FAD.
IMCG has the higher dividend yield at 0.65%, compared with 0.09% for FAD.
IMCG tracks Morningstar US Mid Cap Broad Growth Index, while FAD tracks NASDAQ AlphaDEX Multi Cap Growth Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and First Trust. Their fees differ too: 0.06% for IMCG and 0.63% for FAD.
FAD currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.88 vs 1.51), 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.
Find the right allocation for IMCG and FAD
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