LCGFX vs. SCHG

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

LCGFX (William Blair Large Cap Growth Fund) and SCHG (Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF) are both Large Cap Growth Equities funds. Over the past 10 years, LCGFX returned 16.60%/yr vs 18.65%/yr for SCHG. With a 0.96 correlation, they move nearly in lockstep. LCGFX charges 0.65%/yr vs 0.04%/yr for SCHG.

Performance

LCGFX vs. SCHG - Performance Comparison

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, LCGFX achieves a 0.13% return, which is significantly lower than SCHG's 1.35% return. Over the past 10 years, LCGFX has underperformed SCHG with an annualized return of 16.60%, while SCHG has yielded a comparatively higher 18.65% annualized return.

LCGFX

• 1D: -1.69%
• 1M: -2.49%
• YTD: 0.13%
• 6M: -0.72%
• 1Y: 10.24%
• 3Y*: 17.31%
• 5Y*: 8.79%
• 10Y*: 16.60%

SCHG

• 1D: -1.37%
• 1M: -3.93%
• YTD: 1.35%
• 6M: 0.09%
• 1Y: 17.91%
• 3Y*: 22.13%
• 5Y*: 13.27%
• 10Y*: 18.65%

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

LCGFX vs. SCHG - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
LCGFX William Blair Large Cap Growth Fund	0.13%	11.79%	26.09%	40.48%	-32.48%	28.29%	36.64%	36.44%	5.18%	31.29%
SCHG Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF	1.35%	17.50%	34.95%	50.10%	-31.80%	28.11%	39.14%	36.02%	-1.36%	28.05%

Correlation

The correlation between LCGFX and SCHG is 0.96 - these two move nearly in lockstep. At this level, holding both provides almost no diversification benefit. If you already own one, adding the other does little to reduce portfolio risk.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.96
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.96
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.97
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.96
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 11, 2009	0.96

The correlation between LCGFX and SCHG has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.96 to 0.97 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

LCGFX vs. SCHG — Risk / Return Rank

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

LCGFX

LCGFX Risk / Return Rank: 8
LCGFX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9
LCGFX Sortino Ratio Rank: 9
LCGFX Omega Ratio Rank: 9
LCGFX Calmar Ratio Rank: 6
LCGFX Martin Ratio Rank: 6

SCHG

SCHG Risk / Return Rank: 28
SCHG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 31
SCHG Sortino Ratio Rank: 30
SCHG Omega Ratio Rank: 30
SCHG Calmar Ratio Rank: 23
SCHG Martin Ratio Rank: 27

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.

LCGFX vs. SCHG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for William Blair Large Cap Growth Fund (LCGFX) and Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF (SCHG). 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	SCHG	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.71	1.11	-0.40
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.05	1.56	-0.52
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.13	1.20	-0.07
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.55	1.10	-0.54
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	1.53	3.58	-2.05

LCGFX vs. SCHG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current LCGFX Sharpe Ratio is 0.71, which is lower than the SCHG Sharpe Ratio of 1.11. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of LCGFX and SCHG, 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. SCHG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum LCGFX drawdown since its inception was -62.95%, which is greater than SCHG's maximum drawdown of -34.59%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LCGFX and SCHG.

Drawdown Indicators

	LCGFX	SCHG	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-62.95%	-34.59%	-28.36%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-20.59%	-16.41%	-4.18%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-23.83%	-23.39%	-0.44%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-37.25%	-34.59%	-2.66%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-37.25%	-34.59%	-2.66%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-6.01%	-6.46%	+0.45%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-21.44%	-5.20%	-16.24%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	7.42%	5.02%	+2.40%

Volatility

LCGFX vs. SCHG - Volatility Comparison

William Blair Large Cap Growth Fund (LCGFX) and Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF (SCHG) have volatilities of 5.89% and 5.91%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	LCGFX	SCHG	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.89%	5.91%	-0.02%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	12.64%	12.52%	+0.12%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	16.15%	16.24%	-0.09%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	21.87%	22.38%	-0.51%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	21.35%	21.58%	-0.23%

LCGFX vs. SCHG - Expense Ratio Comparison

LCGFX has a 0.65% expense ratio, which is higher than SCHG's 0.04% expense ratio.

Dividends

LCGFX vs. SCHG - Dividend Comparison

LCGFX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 8.55%, more than SCHG's 0.38% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
LCGFX William Blair Large Cap Growth Fund	8.55%	8.56%	5.97%	0.00%	0.82%	4.29%	3.83%	6.46%	17.08%	0.56%	1.10%	9.86%
SCHG Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF	0.38%	0.36%	0.39%	0.46%	0.55%	0.42%	0.52%	0.82%	1.27%	1.01%	1.04%	1.22%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both LCGFX and SCHG in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.96, LCGFX and SCHG move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

Which is riskier, LCGFX or SCHG?

SCHG has higher volatility (5.91%) compared to LCGFX (5.89%). In terms of maximum drawdown, LCGFX dropped -62.95% vs SCHG's -34.59%.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

SCHG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.11 vs 0.71), 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.