PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
IWLG vs. GQGU
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

IWLG vs. GQGU - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in NYLI Winslow Large Cap Growth ETF (IWLG) and GQG US Equity ETF (GQGU). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, IWLG achieves a 4.41% return, which is significantly lower than GQGU's 5.95% return.


IWLG

1D
1.30%
1M
2.71%
6M
4.32%
YTD
4.41%
1Y
9.67%
3Y*
20.57%
5Y*
10Y*

GQGU

1D
-0.15%
1M
-0.42%
6M
6.34%
YTD
5.95%
1Y
4.74%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

IWLG vs. GQGU - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)2025
IWLG
NYLI Winslow Large Cap Growth ETF
4.41%5.26%
GQGU
GQG US Equity ETF
5.95%-1.12%

Correlation

The correlation between IWLG and GQGU is -0.36, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.


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

-0.36

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 14, 2025

-0.36

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

IWLG vs. GQGU — Risk / Return Rank

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

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

GQGU
GQGU Risk / Return Rank: 1717
Overall Rank
GQGU Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1717
Sharpe Ratio Rank
GQGU Sortino Ratio Rank: 1616
Sortino Ratio Rank
GQGU Omega Ratio Rank: 1616
Omega Ratio Rank
GQGU Calmar Ratio Rank: 1717
Calmar Ratio Rank
GQGU Martin Ratio Rank: 1717
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.

IWLG vs. GQGU - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for NYLI Winslow Large Cap Growth ETF (IWLG) and GQG US Equity ETF (GQGU). 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.


IWLGGQGUDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.09

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.13

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.10

1.08

+0.02

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

0.50

0.57

-0.07

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

1.49

1.38

+0.11

IWLG vs. GQGU - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IWLG Sharpe Ratio is 0.54, which is comparable to the GQGU Sharpe Ratio of 0.44. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IWLG and GQGU, 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

IWLG vs. GQGU - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IWLG drawdown since its inception was -23.19%, which is greater than GQGU's maximum drawdown of -8.41%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IWLG and GQGU.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


IWLGGQGUDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-23.19%

-8.41%

-14.78%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-19.45%

-8.41%

-11.04%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-23.19%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-2.50%

-5.24%

+2.74%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-4.55%

-2.89%

-1.66%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

6.52%

3.45%

+3.07%

Volatility

IWLG vs. GQGU - Volatility Comparison

NYLI Winslow Large Cap Growth ETF (IWLG) has a higher volatility of 6.92% compared to GQG US Equity ETF (GQGU) at 4.59%. This indicates that IWLG's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than GQGU based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


IWLGGQGUDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

6.92%

4.59%

+2.33%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

14.66%

8.53%

+6.13%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

18.06%

10.72%

+7.34%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

21.14%

10.72%

+10.42%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

21.14%

10.72%

+10.42%

IWLG vs. GQGU - Expense Ratio Comparison

IWLG has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is higher than GQGU's 0.49% expense ratio.


Dividends

IWLG vs. GQGU - Dividend Comparison

IWLG has not paid dividends to shareholders, while GQGU's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.96%.


PositionTTM2025202420232022
GQGU
GQG US Equity ETF
0.96%1.02%0.00%0.00%0.00%
IWLG
NYLI Winslow Large Cap Growth ETF
0.00%0.00%1.34%0.01%0.05%

Frequently Asked Questions


IWLG and GQGU have a correlation of -0.36, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

IWLG has higher volatility (6.92%) compared to GQGU (4.59%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IWLG dropped -23.19% vs GQGU's -8.41%.

On 1-year performance, IWLG leads with 9.67% vs 4.74% for GQGU. On fees, GQGU is cheaper at 0.49% per year. On volatility, GQGU has been the lower-risk option at 4.59%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, IWLG has performed better with a 9.67% return vs 4.74%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

GQGU is cheaper with a 0.49% expense ratio, compared with 0.50% for IWLG.

GQGU has the higher dividend yield at 0.96%, compared with 0.00% for IWLG.

They also come from different issuers: NYLI and GQG Partners. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for IWLG and 0.49% for GQGU.

IWLG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.54 vs 0.44), 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 IWLG and GQGU

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