IWFG vs. QCLR
IWFG (NYLI Winslow Focused Large Cap Growth ETF) and QCLR (Global X NASDAQ 100 Collar 95-110 ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - IWFG is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund actively managed by New York Life, while QCLR is a Nasdaq-100 fund tracking the NASDAQ-100 Quarterly Collar 95-110 Index. IWFG is actively managed, while QCLR is passively managed. Over the past 3 years, IWFG returned 23.02%/yr vs 13.84%/yr for QCLR. Their correlation of 0.86 suggests significant overlap in exposure. IWFG charges 0.46%/yr vs 0.60%/yr for QCLR.
Performance
IWFG vs. QCLR - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, IWFG achieves a 2.08% return, which is significantly higher than QCLR's 1.40% return.
IWFG
- 1D
- -1.30%
- 1M
- 4.41%
- YTD
- 2.08%
- 6M
- 1.13%
- 1Y
- 11.87%
- 3Y*
- 23.02%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
QCLR
- 1D
- 0.00%
- 1M
- 1.52%
- YTD
- 1.40%
- 6M
- -0.07%
- 1Y
- 11.39%
- 3Y*
- 13.84%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
IWFG vs. QCLR - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
IWFG NYLI Winslow Focused Large Cap Growth ETF | 2.08% | 14.33% | 37.56% | 38.40% | 3.75% |
QCLR Global X NASDAQ 100 Collar 95-110 ETF | 1.40% | 11.27% | 20.27% | 28.87% | -6.64% |
Correlation
The correlation between IWFG and QCLR is 0.86, 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 | 0.86 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.87 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 24, 2022 | 0.86 |
The correlation between IWFG and QCLR has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.86 to 0.87 - a consistent structural relationship.
IWFG vs. QCLR - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
IWFG
QCLR
Technology
Communication Services
Consumer Cyclical
Industrials
Healthcare
Financial Services
Utilities
Basic Materials
-
Consumer Defensive
-
Energy
-
Real Estate
-
Technology
IWFG
QCLR
Communication Services
IWFG
QCLR
Consumer Cyclical
IWFG
QCLR
Industrials
IWFG
QCLR
Healthcare
IWFG
QCLR
Financial Services
IWFG
QCLR
Utilities
IWFG
QCLR
Basic Materials
IWFG
-
QCLR
Consumer Defensive
IWFG
-
QCLR
Energy
IWFG
-
QCLR
Real Estate
IWFG
-
QCLR
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. QCLR — Risk / Return Rank
IWFG
QCLR
IWFG vs. QCLR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for NYLI Winslow Focused Large Cap Growth ETF (IWFG) and Global X NASDAQ 100 Collar 95-110 ETF (QCLR). 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.
| IWFG | QCLR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.44 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.53 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.13 | 1.22 | -0.08 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.59 | 1.12 | -0.53 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 1.73 | 4.02 | -2.30 |
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
| IWFG | QCLR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.72 | 1.17 | -0.44 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 1.16 | 0.67 | +0.49 |
Drawdowns
IWFG vs. QCLR - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum IWFG drawdown since its inception was -21.97%, roughly equal to the maximum QCLR drawdown of -21.77%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IWFG and QCLR.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| IWFG | QCLR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -21.97% | -21.77% | -0.20% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -20.20% | -10.22% | -9.98% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -21.97% | -13.58% | -8.39% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -2.79% | -0.89% | -1.90% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -4.13% | -6.20% | +2.07% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 6.89% | 2.84% | +4.05% |
Volatility
IWFG vs. QCLR - Volatility Comparison
NYLI Winslow Focused Large Cap Growth ETF (IWFG) has a higher volatility of 3.85% compared to Global X NASDAQ 100 Collar 95-110 ETF (QCLR) at 0.45%. This indicates that IWFG's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than QCLR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| IWFG | QCLR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 3.85% | 0.45% | +3.40% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 12.59% | 7.24% | +5.35% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 16.50% | 9.82% | +6.68% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 20.48% | 12.42% | +8.06% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 20.48% | 12.42% | +8.06% |
IWFG vs. QCLR - Expense Ratio Comparison
IWFG has a 0.46% expense ratio, which is lower than QCLR's 0.60% expense ratio.
Dividends
IWFG vs. QCLR - Dividend Comparison
IWFG has not paid dividends to shareholders, while QCLR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 14.68%.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
IWFG NYLI Winslow Focused Large Cap Growth ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% | 5.44% | 1.01% | 0.05% | 0.00% |
QCLR Global X NASDAQ 100 Collar 95-110 ETF | 14.68% | 14.89% | 8.89% | 0.47% | 0.27% | 1.64% |
Frequently Asked Questions
IWFG and QCLR have a correlation of 0.86, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
IWFG has higher volatility (3.85%) compared to QCLR (0.45%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IWFG dropped -21.97% vs QCLR's -21.77%.
On 3-year performance, IWFG leads with 23.02% vs 13.84% for QCLR. On fees, IWFG is cheaper at 0.46% per year. On volatility, QCLR has been the lower-risk option at 0.45%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 3-year period, IWFG has performed better with a 23.02% return vs 13.84%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
IWFG is cheaper with a 0.46% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for QCLR.
QCLR has the higher dividend yield at 14.68%, compared with 0.00% for IWFG.
IWFG is categorized as Large Cap Growth Equities, while QCLR is Nasdaq-100. They also come from different issuers: New York Life and Global X. Their fees differ too: 0.46% for IWFG and 0.60% for QCLR.
QCLR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.17 vs 0.72), 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.
Find the right allocation for IWFG and QCLR
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