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

Performance

IWFG vs. ILCG - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in NYLI Winslow Focused Large Cap Growth ETF (IWFG) and iShares Morningstar Growth ETF (ILCG). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, IWFG achieves a 2.57% return, which is significantly lower than ILCG's 14.41% return.


IWFG

1D
0.49%
1M
4.54%
YTD
2.57%
6M
1.67%
1Y
11.70%
3Y*
23.23%
5Y*
10Y*

ILCG

1D
-0.06%
1M
6.73%
YTD
14.41%
6M
14.04%
1Y
28.93%
3Y*
26.58%
5Y*
14.94%
10Y*
18.11%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

IWFG vs. ILCG - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)2025202420232022
IWFG
NYLI Winslow Focused Large Cap Growth ETF
2.57%14.33%37.56%38.40%3.75%
ILCG
iShares Morningstar Growth ETF
14.41%16.71%32.82%40.41%-3.82%

Correlation

The correlation between IWFG and ILCG is 0.95 - these two move nearly in lockstep. At this level, holding both provides almost no diversification benefit. If you already own one, adding the other does little to reduce portfolio risk.


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

0.95

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

0.96

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 24, 2022

0.96

The correlation between IWFG and ILCG has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.95 to 0.96 - a consistent structural relationship.

IWFG vs. ILCG - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
IWFG
ILCG

Technology

52.4%
49.8%

Communication Services

13.3%
14.5%

Consumer Cyclical

11.0%
10.6%

Industrials

7.5%
8.3%

Healthcare

5.5%
5.3%

Financial Services

4.8%
6.0%

Utilities

4.0%
0.8%

Basic Materials

-

1.1%

Consumer Defensive

-

1.6%

Energy

-

0.5%

Real Estate

-

1.4%

Technology

IWFG
52.4%
ILCG
49.8%

Communication Services

IWFG
13.3%
ILCG
14.5%

Consumer Cyclical

IWFG
11.0%
ILCG
10.6%

Industrials

IWFG
7.5%
ILCG
8.3%

Healthcare

IWFG
5.5%
ILCG
5.3%

Financial Services

IWFG
4.8%
ILCG
6.0%

Utilities

IWFG
4.0%
ILCG
0.8%

Basic Materials

IWFG

-

ILCG
1.1%

Consumer Defensive

IWFG

-

ILCG
1.6%

Energy

IWFG

-

ILCG
0.5%

Real Estate

IWFG

-

ILCG
1.4%

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

IWFG vs. ILCG — Risk / Return Rank

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

IWFG
IWFG Risk / Return Rank: 1919
Overall Rank
IWFG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2121
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IWFG Sortino Ratio Rank: 2121
Sortino Ratio Rank
IWFG Omega Ratio Rank: 2121
Omega Ratio Rank
IWFG Calmar Ratio Rank: 1616
Calmar Ratio Rank
IWFG Martin Ratio Rank: 1818
Martin Ratio Rank

ILCG
ILCG Risk / Return Rank: 4747
Overall Rank
ILCG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5353
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ILCG Sortino Ratio Rank: 5050
Sortino Ratio Rank
ILCG Omega Ratio Rank: 5151
Omega Ratio Rank
ILCG Calmar Ratio Rank: 3838
Calmar Ratio Rank
ILCG Martin Ratio Rank: 4242
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.

IWFG vs. ILCG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for NYLI Winslow Focused Large Cap Growth ETF (IWFG) and iShares Morningstar Growth ETF (ILCG). 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.


IWFGILCGDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-1.07

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-1.35

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.13

1.31

-0.18

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

0.58

1.86

-1.28

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

1.70

6.54

-4.84

IWFG vs. ILCG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IWFG Sharpe Ratio is 0.71, which is lower than the ILCG Sharpe Ratio of 1.78. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IWFG and ILCG, 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


IWFGILCGDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.71

1.78

-1.07

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.68

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.84

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

1.17

0.59

+0.58

Drawdowns

IWFG vs. ILCG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IWFG drawdown since its inception was -21.97%, smaller than the maximum ILCG drawdown of -52.98%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IWFG and ILCG.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


IWFGILCGDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-21.97%

-52.98%

+31.01%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-20.20%

-15.65%

-4.55%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-21.97%

-23.10%

+1.13%

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

-2.32%

-1.08%

-1.24%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-4.13%

-8.22%

+4.09%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

6.89%

4.43%

+2.46%

Volatility

IWFG vs. ILCG - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for NYLI Winslow Focused Large Cap Growth ETF (IWFG) is 3.86%, while iShares Morningstar Growth ETF (ILCG) has a volatility of 4.39%. This indicates that IWFG experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than ILCG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


IWFGILCGDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.86%

4.39%

-0.53%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

12.58%

12.81%

-0.23%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

16.49%

16.30%

+0.19%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

20.47%

21.99%

-1.52%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

20.47%

21.53%

-1.06%

IWFG vs. ILCG - Expense Ratio Comparison

IWFG has a 0.46% expense ratio, which is higher than ILCG's 0.04% expense ratio.


Dividends

IWFG vs. ILCG - Dividend Comparison

IWFG has not paid dividends to shareholders, while ILCG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.40%.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
ILCG
iShares Morningstar Growth ETF
0.40%0.47%0.50%0.69%0.75%0.34%0.28%0.54%0.81%0.89%0.95%0.99%
IWFG
NYLI Winslow Focused Large Cap Growth ETF
0.00%0.00%5.44%1.01%0.05%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


With a correlation of 0.95, IWFG and ILCG 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.

ILCG has higher volatility (4.39%) compared to IWFG (3.86%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IWFG dropped -21.97% vs ILCG's -52.98%.

On 3-year performance, ILCG leads with 26.58% vs 23.23% for IWFG. On fees, ILCG is cheaper at 0.04% per year. On volatility, IWFG has been the lower-risk option at 3.86%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 3-year period, ILCG has performed better with a 26.58% return vs 23.23%. 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 0.46% for IWFG.

ILCG has the higher dividend yield at 0.40%, compared with 0.00% for IWFG.

They also come from different issuers: New York Life and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.46% for IWFG and 0.04% for ILCG.

ILCG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.78 vs 0.71), 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 IWFG and ILCG

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