IWLG vs. QWLD
IWLG (NYLI Winslow Large Cap Growth ETF) and QWLD (SPDR MSCI World StrategicFactors ETF) are both Large Cap Growth Equities funds. IWLG is actively managed, while QWLD is passively managed. Over the past 3 years, IWLG returned 21.15%/yr vs 15.70%/yr for QWLD. A 0.77 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. IWLG charges 0.50%/yr vs 0.30%/yr for QWLD.
Performance
IWLG vs. QWLD - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, IWLG achieves a 1.43% return, which is significantly lower than QWLD's 5.43% return.
IWLG
- 1D
- -0.08%
- 1M
- -1.59%
- YTD
- 1.43%
- 6M
- -0.03%
- 1Y
- 8.98%
- 3Y*
- 21.15%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
QWLD
- 1D
- -0.02%
- 1M
- -1.40%
- YTD
- 5.43%
- 6M
- 4.73%
- 1Y
- 14.76%
- 3Y*
- 15.70%
- 5Y*
- 9.65%
- 10Y*
- 11.74%
IWLG vs. QWLD - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
IWLG NYLI Winslow Large Cap Growth ETF | 1.43% | 14.73% | 31.47% | 43.25% | 1.48% |
QWLD SPDR MSCI World StrategicFactors ETF | 5.43% | 17.93% | 14.44% | 19.59% | 4.36% |
Correlation
The correlation between IWLG and QWLD is 0.63, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.63 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.71 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 23, 2022 | 0.77 |
The correlation between IWLG and QWLD shifts across timeframes, from 0.63 (1 year) to 0.77 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
IWLG vs. QWLD - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
IWLG
QWLD
Technology
Industrials
Communication Services
Consumer Cyclical
Healthcare
Financial Services
Consumer Defensive
Utilities
Basic Materials
Energy
-
Real Estate
-
Technology
IWLG
QWLD
Industrials
IWLG
QWLD
Communication Services
IWLG
QWLD
Consumer Cyclical
IWLG
QWLD
Healthcare
IWLG
QWLD
Financial Services
IWLG
QWLD
Consumer Defensive
IWLG
QWLD
Utilities
IWLG
QWLD
Basic Materials
IWLG
QWLD
Energy
IWLG
-
QWLD
Real Estate
IWLG
-
QWLD
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. QWLD — Risk / Return Rank
IWLG
QWLD
IWLG vs. QWLD - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for NYLI Winslow Large Cap Growth ETF (IWLG) and SPDR MSCI World StrategicFactors ETF (QWLD). 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.
| IWLG | QWLD | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -1.00 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -1.38 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.10 | 1.27 | -0.17 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.46 | 1.94 | -1.47 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 1.39 | 8.32 | -6.93 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
IWLG vs. QWLD - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum IWLG drawdown since its inception was -23.19%, smaller than the maximum QWLD drawdown of -31.89%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IWLG and QWLD.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| IWLG | QWLD | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -23.19% | -31.89% | +8.70% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -19.45% | -7.66% | -11.79% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -23.19% | -12.40% | -10.79% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -22.84% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -31.89% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -5.28% | -1.79% | -3.49% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -4.56% | -3.69% | -0.87% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 6.47% | 1.78% | +4.69% |
Volatility
IWLG vs. QWLD - Volatility Comparison
NYLI Winslow Large Cap Growth ETF (IWLG) has a higher volatility of 7.68% compared to SPDR MSCI World StrategicFactors ETF (QWLD) at 2.78%. This indicates that IWLG's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than QWLD based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| IWLG | QWLD | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 7.68% | 2.78% | +4.90% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 13.93% | 7.82% | +6.11% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 17.63% | 9.81% | +7.82% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 21.13% | 13.54% | +7.59% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 21.13% | 15.17% | +5.96% |
IWLG vs. QWLD - Expense Ratio Comparison
IWLG has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is higher than QWLD's 0.30% expense ratio.
Dividends
IWLG vs. QWLD - Dividend Comparison
IWLG has not paid dividends to shareholders, while QWLD's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.85%.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
IWLG NYLI Winslow Large Cap Growth ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% | 1.34% | 0.01% | 0.05% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
QWLD SPDR MSCI World StrategicFactors ETF | 1.85% | 1.85% | 1.74% | 1.78% | 2.02% | 1.77% | 1.77% | 2.13% | 2.33% | 2.73% | 2.22% | 3.42% |
Frequently Asked Questions
IWLG and QWLD have a correlation of 0.63, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
IWLG has higher volatility (7.68%) compared to QWLD (2.78%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IWLG dropped -23.19% vs QWLD's -31.89%.
On 3-year performance, IWLG leads with 21.15% vs 15.70% for QWLD. On fees, QWLD is cheaper at 0.30% per year. On volatility, QWLD has been the lower-risk option at 2.78%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 3-year period, IWLG has performed better with a 21.15% return vs 15.70%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
QWLD is cheaper with a 0.30% expense ratio, compared with 0.50% for IWLG.
QWLD has the higher dividend yield at 1.85%, compared with 0.00% for IWLG.
They also come from different issuers: NYLI and State Street. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for IWLG and 0.30% for QWLD.
QWLD currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.52 vs 0.51), 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 IWLG and QWLD
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