PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
LEAD vs. DGRW
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

LEAD vs. DGRW - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Siren DIVCON Leaders Dividend ETF (LEAD) and WisdomTree U.S. Quality Dividend Growth Fund (DGRW). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, LEAD achieves a 15.75% return, which is significantly higher than DGRW's 9.10% return. Both investments have delivered pretty close results over the past 10 years, with LEAD having a 14.71% annualized return and DGRW not far behind at 14.15%.


LEAD

1D
0.48%
1M
4.84%
YTD
15.75%
6M
14.25%
1Y
25.56%
3Y*
19.23%
5Y*
12.16%
10Y*
14.71%

DGRW

1D
-0.83%
1M
4.06%
YTD
9.10%
6M
8.62%
1Y
20.79%
3Y*
16.64%
5Y*
12.17%
10Y*
14.15%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

LEAD vs. DGRW - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
LEAD
Siren DIVCON Leaders Dividend ETF
15.75%15.52%10.32%26.25%-18.16%29.69%23.41%33.75%-6.63%24.89%
DGRW
WisdomTree U.S. Quality Dividend Growth Fund
9.10%12.17%16.98%18.66%-6.33%24.46%13.87%29.54%-5.38%26.90%

Correlation

The correlation between LEAD and DGRW is 0.82, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.


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

0.82

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.89

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.90

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.88

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 7, 2016

0.86

The correlation between LEAD and DGRW has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.82 to 0.90 - a consistent structural relationship.

LEAD vs. DGRW - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
LEAD
DGRW

Technology

36.5%
32.1%

Industrials

31.1%
9.9%

Financial Services

16.2%
11.3%

Healthcare

5.7%
12.8%

Consumer Defensive

3.8%
6.7%

Consumer Cyclical

1.3%
7.1%

Energy

1.3%
5.0%

Communication Services

0.1%
10.1%

Basic Materials

-

3.3%

Real Estate

-

-

Utilities

-

0.2%

Technology

LEAD
36.5%
DGRW
32.1%

Industrials

LEAD
31.1%
DGRW
9.9%

Financial Services

LEAD
16.2%
DGRW
11.3%

Healthcare

LEAD
5.7%
DGRW
12.8%

Consumer Defensive

LEAD
3.8%
DGRW
6.7%

Consumer Cyclical

LEAD
1.3%
DGRW
7.1%

Energy

LEAD
1.3%
DGRW
5.0%

Communication Services

LEAD
0.1%
DGRW
10.1%

Basic Materials

LEAD

-

DGRW
3.3%

Real Estate

LEAD

-

DGRW

-

Utilities

LEAD

-

DGRW
0.2%

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

LEAD vs. DGRW — Risk / Return Rank

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

LEAD
LEAD Risk / Return Rank: 5656
Overall Rank
LEAD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5151
Sharpe Ratio Rank
LEAD Sortino Ratio Rank: 5151
Sortino Ratio Rank
LEAD Omega Ratio Rank: 4949
Omega Ratio Rank
LEAD Calmar Ratio Rank: 6060
Calmar Ratio Rank
LEAD Martin Ratio Rank: 6969
Martin Ratio Rank

DGRW
DGRW Risk / Return Rank: 6060
Overall Rank
DGRW Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6161
Sharpe Ratio Rank
DGRW Sortino Ratio Rank: 6565
Sortino Ratio Rank
DGRW Omega Ratio Rank: 6363
Omega Ratio Rank
DGRW Calmar Ratio Rank: 5050
Calmar Ratio Rank
DGRW Martin Ratio Rank: 6161
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.

LEAD vs. DGRW - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Siren DIVCON Leaders Dividend ETF (LEAD) and WisdomTree U.S. Quality Dividend Growth Fund (DGRW). 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.


LEADDGRWDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.35

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.62

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.31

1.39

-0.08

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.97

2.52

+0.45

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

12.66

11.03

+1.63

LEAD vs. DGRW - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current LEAD Sharpe Ratio is 1.77, which is comparable to the DGRW Sharpe Ratio of 2.12. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of LEAD and DGRW, 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...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


LEADDGRWDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.77

2.12

-0.35

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.71

0.88

-0.17

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.79

0.88

-0.08

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.80

0.86

-0.05

Drawdowns

LEAD vs. DGRW - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum LEAD drawdown since its inception was -32.19%, roughly equal to the maximum DGRW drawdown of -32.04%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LEAD and DGRW.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


LEADDGRWDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-32.19%

-32.04%

-0.15%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-8.65%

-8.30%

-0.35%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-17.86%

-16.21%

-1.65%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-24.93%

-17.27%

-7.66%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-32.19%

-32.04%

-0.15%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

0.00%

-0.83%

+0.83%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-4.42%

-3.01%

-1.41%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.02%

1.89%

+0.13%

Volatility

LEAD vs. DGRW - Volatility Comparison

Siren DIVCON Leaders Dividend ETF (LEAD) has a higher volatility of 4.12% compared to WisdomTree U.S. Quality Dividend Growth Fund (DGRW) at 2.47%. This indicates that LEAD's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than DGRW based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


LEADDGRWDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.12%

2.47%

+1.65%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

11.33%

7.64%

+3.69%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

14.56%

9.88%

+4.68%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

17.34%

13.97%

+3.37%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

18.65%

16.21%

+2.44%

LEAD vs. DGRW - Expense Ratio Comparison

LEAD has a 0.43% expense ratio, which is higher than DGRW's 0.28% expense ratio.


Dividends

LEAD vs. DGRW - Dividend Comparison

LEAD's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.58%, less than DGRW's 1.27% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
DGRW
WisdomTree U.S. Quality Dividend Growth Fund
1.27%1.43%1.55%1.74%2.15%1.78%1.93%2.20%2.42%1.71%2.13%2.18%
LEAD
Siren DIVCON Leaders Dividend ETF
0.58%0.70%0.93%1.13%1.27%1.79%0.81%1.32%1.38%0.97%1.38%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


LEAD and DGRW have a correlation of 0.82, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

LEAD has higher volatility (4.12%) compared to DGRW (2.47%). In terms of maximum drawdown, LEAD dropped -32.19% vs DGRW's -32.04%.

On 10-year performance, LEAD leads with 14.71% vs 14.15% for DGRW. On fees, DGRW is cheaper at 0.28% per year. On volatility, DGRW has been the lower-risk option at 2.47%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, LEAD has performed better with a 14.71% return vs 14.15%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

DGRW is cheaper with a 0.28% expense ratio, compared with 0.43% for LEAD.

DGRW has the higher dividend yield at 1.27%, compared with 0.58% for LEAD.

LEAD is categorized as Large Cap Growth Equities, while DGRW is Dividend. LEAD tracks Siren DIVCON Leaders Dividend Index, while DGRW tracks WisdomTree U.S. Quality Dividend Growth Index. They also come from different issuers: SRN Advisors and WisdomTree. Their fees differ too: 0.43% for LEAD and 0.28% for DGRW.

DGRW currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.12 vs 1.77), 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 LEAD and DGRW

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