LCGFX vs. GTLLX

Last updated Aug 4, 2026

LCGFX (William Blair Large Cap Growth Fund) and GTLLX (Glenmede Quantitative U.S. Large Cap Growth Equity Portfolio) are both Large Cap Growth Equities funds. Over the past 10 years, LCGFX returned 15.88%/yr vs 16.32%/yr for GTLLX. Their correlation of 0.92 means they have usually moved in the same direction. LCGFX charges 0.65%/yr vs 0.85%/yr for GTLLX.

Performance

LCGFX vs. GTLLX - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in William Blair Large Cap Growth Fund (LCGFX) and Glenmede Quantitative U.S. Large Cap Growth Equity Portfolio (GTLLX). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, LCGFX achieves a 1.29% return, which is significantly lower than GTLLX's 21.57% return. Both investments have delivered pretty close results over the past 10 years, with LCGFX having a 15.88% annualized return and GTLLX not far ahead at 16.32%.

LCGFX

• 1D: 1.03%
• 1M: 0.66%
• 6M: 3.32%
• YTD: 1.29%
• 1Y: 5.73%
• 3Y*: 16.15%
• 5Y*: 7.94%
• 10Y*: 15.88%
• ALL TIME*: 7.16%

GTLLX

• 1D: 0.85%
• 1M: -0.06%
• 6M: 19.60%
• YTD: 21.57%
• 1Y: 33.91%
• 3Y*: 22.75%
• 5Y*: 13.35%
• 10Y*: 16.32%
• ALL TIME*: 12.47%

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
GTLLX Glenmede Quantitative U.S. Large Cap Growth Equity Portfolio	$0.00	$0.00	$0.00
LCGFX William Blair Large Cap Growth Fund	$0.00	$0.00	$0.00

LCGFX vs. GTLLX - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
LCGFX William Blair Large Cap Growth Fund	1.29%	11.79%	26.09%	40.48%	-32.48%	28.29%	36.64%	36.44%	5.18%	31.29%
GTLLX Glenmede Quantitative U.S. Large Cap Growth Equity Portfolio	21.57%	17.44%	20.71%	27.10%	-21.69%	32.91%	18.80%	34.86%	-5.23%	27.83%

Correlation

The correlation between LCGFX and GTLLX is 0.80, meaning they have usually moved in the same direction, including during past declines.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.80
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history.	0.86
Correlation (5Y) Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period.	0.90
Correlation (10Y) Provides a long-term view across more market conditions.	0.90
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 3, 2005	0.92

The correlation between LCGFX and GTLLX shifts across timeframes, from 0.80 (1 year) to 0.92 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

LCGFX vs. GTLLX — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

LCGFX

LCGFX Risk / Return Rank: 6
LCGFX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6
LCGFX Sortino Ratio Rank: 6
LCGFX Omega Ratio Rank: 6
LCGFX Calmar Ratio Rank: 6
LCGFX Martin Ratio Rank: 6

GTLLX

GTLLX Risk / Return Rank: 73
GTLLX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 71
GTLLX Sortino Ratio Rank: 67
GTLLX Omega Ratio Rank: 58
GTLLX Calmar Ratio Rank: 85
GTLLX Martin Ratio Rank: 85

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

LCGFX vs. GTLLX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for William Blair Large Cap Growth Fund (LCGFX) and Glenmede Quantitative U.S. Large Cap Growth Equity Portfolio (GTLLX). 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.

	LCGFX	GTLLX	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.20	1.73	-1.52
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.39	2.40	-2.01
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.05	1.29	-0.24
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.16	3.02	-2.86
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	0.44	11.21	-10.77

LCGFX vs. GTLLX - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current LCGFX Sharpe Ratio is 0.20, which is lower than the GTLLX Sharpe Ratio of 1.73. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of LCGFX and GTLLX, 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

LCGFX vs. GTLLX - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum LCGFX drawdown since its inception was -62.95%, which is greater than GTLLX's maximum drawdown of -54.32%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LCGFX and GTLLX.

Drawdown Indicators

	LCGFX	GTLLX	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-62.95%	-54.32%	-8.63%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-20.59%	-10.76%	-9.83%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-23.83%	-41.54%	+17.71%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-37.25%	-41.54%	+4.29%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-37.25%	-41.54%	+4.29%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-4.92%	-2.83%	-2.09%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-21.38%	-8.54%	-12.84%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	7.67%	2.89%	+4.78%

Volatility

LCGFX vs. GTLLX - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for William Blair Large Cap Growth Fund (LCGFX) is 4.68%, while Glenmede Quantitative U.S. Large Cap Growth Equity Portfolio (GTLLX) has a volatility of 5.24%. This indicates that LCGFX experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than GTLLX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	LCGFX	GTLLX	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.68%	5.24%	-0.56%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	12.88%	15.43%	-2.55%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	16.62%	18.85%	-2.23%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	21.93%	29.22%	-7.29%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	21.34%	25.10%	-3.76%

LCGFX vs. GTLLX - Expense Ratio Comparison

LCGFX has a 0.65% expense ratio, which is lower than GTLLX's 0.85% expense ratio.

Dividends

LCGFX vs. GTLLX - Dividend Comparison

LCGFX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 8.45%, less than GTLLX's 12.61% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
GTLLX Glenmede Quantitative U.S. Large Cap Growth Equity Portfolio	12.61%	15.33%	40.42%	4.91%	7.93%	20.20%	15.12%	14.10%	16.97%	2.29%	0.58%	0.61%
LCGFX William Blair Large Cap Growth Fund	8.45%	8.56%	5.97%	0.00%	0.82%	4.29%	3.83%	6.46%	17.08%	0.56%	1.10%	9.86%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both LCGFX and GTLLX in my portfolio?

LCGFX and GTLLX have a correlation of 0.80, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, LCGFX or GTLLX?

GTLLX has higher volatility (5.24%) compared to LCGFX (4.68%). In terms of maximum drawdown, LCGFX dropped -62.95% vs GTLLX's -54.32%.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

GTLLX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.73 vs 0.20), 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.