LAGWX vs. LCFIX

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

LAGWX (Lord Abbett Developing Growth Fund) and LCFIX (Lord Abbett California Tax Free Fund) are both mutual funds - LAGWX is a Small Cap Growth Equities fund managed by Lord Abbett, while LCFIX is a Municipal Bonds fund managed by Lord Abbett. Over the past 10 years, LAGWX returned 15.86%/yr vs 1.69%/yr for LCFIX. At a 0.01 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. LAGWX charges 0.93%/yr vs 0.77%/yr for LCFIX.

Performance

LAGWX vs. LCFIX - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Lord Abbett Developing Growth Fund (LAGWX) and Lord Abbett California Tax Free Fund (LCFIX). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, LAGWX achieves a 37.61% return, which is significantly higher than LCFIX's 2.02% return. Over the past 10 years, LAGWX has outperformed LCFIX with an annualized return of 15.86%, while LCFIX has yielded a comparatively lower 1.69% annualized return.

LAGWX

• 1D: 1.55%
• 1M: 8.02%
• YTD: 37.61%
• 6M: 33.50%
• 1Y: 62.99%
• 3Y*: 24.23%
• 5Y*: 4.82%
• 10Y*: 15.86%

LCFIX

• 1D: -0.10%
• 1M: 2.12%
• YTD: 2.02%
• 6M: 2.43%
• 1Y: 7.40%
• 3Y*: 3.48%
• 5Y*: -0.14%
• 10Y*: 1.69%

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

LAGWX vs. LCFIX - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
LAGWX Lord Abbett Developing Growth Fund	37.61%	14.37%	21.89%	8.50%	-36.09%	-2.77%	72.40%	31.47%	4.52%	29.92%
LCFIX Lord Abbett California Tax Free Fund	2.02%	3.19%	1.87%	6.63%	-13.89%	2.66%	4.65%	9.54%	0.51%	6.72%

Correlation

The correlation between LAGWX and LCFIX is 0.12, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.12
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.08
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.09
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.03
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 30, 1985	0.01

The correlation between LAGWX and LCFIX shifts across timeframes, from 0.01 (all time) to 0.12 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

LAGWX vs. LCFIX — Risk / Return Rank

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

LAGWX

LAGWX Risk / Return Rank: 74
LAGWX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 76
LAGWX Sortino Ratio Rank: 58
LAGWX Omega Ratio Rank: 58
LAGWX Calmar Ratio Rank: 91
LAGWX Martin Ratio Rank: 90

LCFIX

LCFIX Risk / Return Rank: 65
LCFIX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 75
LCFIX Sortino Ratio Rank: 83
LCFIX Omega Ratio Rank: 88
LCFIX Calmar Ratio Rank: 41
LCFIX Martin Ratio Rank: 39

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.

LAGWX vs. LCFIX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Lord Abbett Developing Growth Fund (LAGWX) and Lord Abbett California Tax Free Fund (LCFIX). 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.

	LAGWX	LCFIX	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.33	2.32	+0.01
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.91	3.62	-0.70
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.38	1.57	-0.19
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.46	2.32	+2.14
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	16.32	8.10	+8.21

LAGWX vs. LCFIX - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current LAGWX Sharpe Ratio is 2.33, which is comparable to the LCFIX Sharpe Ratio of 2.32. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of LAGWX and LCFIX, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

LAGWX vs. LCFIX - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum LAGWX drawdown since its inception was -60.31%, which is greater than LCFIX's maximum drawdown of -22.34%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LAGWX and LCFIX.

Drawdown Indicators

	LAGWX	LCFIX	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-60.31%	-22.34%	-37.97%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-14.72%	-3.24%	-11.48%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-32.10%	-6.95%	-25.15%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-51.25%	-19.85%	-31.40%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-54.38%	-19.85%	-34.53%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	-1.91%	+1.91%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-17.05%	-3.30%	-13.75%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.01%	0.93%	+3.08%

Volatility

LAGWX vs. LCFIX - Volatility Comparison

Lord Abbett Developing Growth Fund (LAGWX) has a higher volatility of 10.56% compared to Lord Abbett California Tax Free Fund (LCFIX) at 0.92%. This indicates that LAGWX's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than LCFIX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	LAGWX	LCFIX	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	10.56%	0.92%	+9.64%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	22.96%	2.49%	+20.47%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	28.16%	3.26%	+24.90%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	27.98%	4.81%	+23.17%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	27.40%	4.90%	+22.50%

LAGWX vs. LCFIX - Expense Ratio Comparison

LAGWX has a 0.93% expense ratio, which is higher than LCFIX's 0.77% expense ratio.

Dividends

LAGWX vs. LCFIX - Dividend Comparison

LAGWX has not paid dividends to shareholders, while LCFIX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.54%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
LAGWX Lord Abbett Developing Growth Fund	0.00%	0.00%	0.03%	0.00%	0.00%	12.60%	9.67%	22.87%	33.87%	0.00%	0.00%	10.03%
LCFIX Lord Abbett California Tax Free Fund	3.54%	4.07%	3.04%	2.77%	2.02%	2.19%	2.40%	3.01%	3.09%	3.05%	3.35%	3.37%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both LAGWX and LCFIX in my portfolio?

LAGWX and LCFIX have a correlation of 0.12, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, LAGWX or LCFIX?

LAGWX has higher volatility (10.56%) compared to LCFIX (0.92%). In terms of maximum drawdown, LAGWX dropped -60.31% vs LCFIX's -22.34%.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

LAGWX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.33 vs 2.32), 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.