PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
IMCG vs. NULG
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

IMCG vs. NULG - Performance Comparison

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

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, IMCG achieves a 20.55% return, which is significantly higher than NULG's 15.19% return.


IMCG

1D
-1.53%
1M
5.21%
YTD
20.55%
6M
18.49%
1Y
23.77%
3Y*
18.73%
5Y*
7.83%
10Y*
14.83%

NULG

1D
-2.58%
1M
1.64%
YTD
15.19%
6M
13.84%
1Y
26.26%
3Y*
23.26%
5Y*
13.43%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

IMCG vs. NULG - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
IMCG
iShares Morningstar Mid-Cap Growth ETF
20.55%6.55%18.14%20.73%-25.79%15.39%45.64%35.70%-3.68%25.57%
NULG
Nuveen ESG Large-Cap Growth ETF
15.19%14.07%23.75%42.71%-28.43%28.06%39.58%39.23%0.31%24.57%

Correlation

The correlation between IMCG and NULG is 0.82, 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

0.82

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

0.84

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

0.89

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 14, 2016

0.87

The correlation between IMCG and NULG has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.82 to 0.89 - a consistent structural relationship.

IMCG vs. NULG - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
IMCG
NULG

Technology

34.9%
60.3%

Industrials

25.3%
8.5%

Consumer Cyclical

9.1%
8.7%

Financial Services

8.6%
6.5%

Healthcare

6.9%
5.6%

Basic Materials

4.3%
1.7%

Real Estate

3.1%
1.0%

Utilities

2.5%

-

Communication Services

2.4%
6.0%

Energy

1.7%

-

Consumer Defensive

1.2%
1.8%

Technology

IMCG
34.9%
NULG
60.3%

Industrials

IMCG
25.3%
NULG
8.5%

Consumer Cyclical

IMCG
9.1%
NULG
8.7%

Financial Services

IMCG
8.6%
NULG
6.5%

Healthcare

IMCG
6.9%
NULG
5.6%

Basic Materials

IMCG
4.3%
NULG
1.7%

Real Estate

IMCG
3.1%
NULG
1.0%

Utilities

IMCG
2.5%
NULG

-

Communication Services

IMCG
2.4%
NULG
6.0%

Energy

IMCG
1.7%
NULG

-

Consumer Defensive

IMCG
1.2%
NULG
1.8%

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. NULG — Risk / Return Rank

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

IMCG
IMCG Risk / Return Rank: 4545
Overall Rank
IMCG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4242
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IMCG Sortino Ratio Rank: 4242
Sortino Ratio Rank
IMCG Omega Ratio Rank: 4040
Omega Ratio Rank
IMCG Calmar Ratio Rank: 4949
Calmar Ratio Rank
IMCG Martin Ratio Rank: 5454
Martin Ratio Rank

NULG
NULG Risk / Return Rank: 4141
Overall Rank
NULG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4343
Sharpe Ratio Rank
NULG Sortino Ratio Rank: 4141
Sortino Ratio Rank
NULG Omega Ratio Rank: 4141
Omega Ratio Rank
NULG Calmar Ratio Rank: 3838
Calmar Ratio Rank
NULG Martin Ratio Rank: 4040
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.

IMCG vs. NULG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Morningstar Mid-Cap Growth ETF (IMCG) and Nuveen ESG Large-Cap Growth ETF (NULG). 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.


IMCGNULGDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.02

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.05

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.25

1.26

-0.01

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.35

1.82

+0.53

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

8.95

6.11

+2.83

IMCG vs. NULG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IMCG Sharpe Ratio is 1.42, which is comparable to the NULG Sharpe Ratio of 1.44. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IMCG and NULG, 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...

Drawdowns

IMCG vs. NULG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IMCG drawdown since its inception was -58.96%, which is greater than NULG's maximum drawdown of -36.17%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IMCG and NULG.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


IMCGNULGDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-58.96%

-36.17%

-22.79%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-10.17%

-14.50%

+4.33%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-21.92%

-22.28%

+0.36%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-35.08%

-36.17%

+1.09%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-35.08%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.53%

-2.80%

+1.27%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-9.20%

-6.82%

-2.38%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.66%

4.31%

-1.65%

Volatility

IMCG vs. NULG - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares Morningstar Mid-Cap Growth ETF (IMCG) is 7.43%, while Nuveen ESG Large-Cap Growth ETF (NULG) has a volatility of 7.93%. This indicates that IMCG experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than NULG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


IMCGNULGDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

7.43%

7.93%

-0.50%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

14.09%

14.90%

-0.81%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

16.78%

18.29%

-1.51%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

20.37%

21.74%

-1.37%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

20.59%

21.46%

-0.87%

IMCG vs. NULG - Expense Ratio Comparison

IMCG has a 0.06% expense ratio, which is lower than NULG's 0.25% 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

IMCG vs. NULG - Dividend Comparison

IMCG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.62%, more than NULG's 0.10% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
IMCG
iShares Morningstar Mid-Cap Growth ETF
0.62%0.78%0.78%0.85%0.91%0.41%0.09%0.30%0.35%0.45%0.52%0.38%
NULG
Nuveen ESG Large-Cap Growth ETF
0.10%0.11%0.16%0.43%0.40%5.08%2.68%1.10%3.73%0.61%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


IMCG and NULG have a correlation of 0.82, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

NULG has higher volatility (7.93%) compared to IMCG (7.43%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IMCG dropped -58.96% vs NULG's -36.17%.

On 5-year performance, NULG leads with 13.43% vs 7.83% for IMCG. On fees, IMCG is cheaper at 0.06% per year. On volatility, IMCG has been the lower-risk option at 7.43%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 5-year period, NULG has performed better with a 13.43% return vs 7.83%. 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 0.25% for NULG.

IMCG has the higher dividend yield at 0.62%, compared with 0.10% for NULG.

IMCG is categorized as Mid Cap Growth Equities, while NULG is Large Cap Growth Equities. IMCG tracks Morningstar US Mid Cap Broad Growth Index, while NULG tracks MSCI TIAA ESG USA Large Cap Growth. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Nuveen. Their fees differ too: 0.06% for IMCG and 0.25% for NULG.

NULG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.44 vs 1.42), 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 IMCG and NULG

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