LGRRX vs. EQWL

Last updated Aug 1, 2026

LGRRX (Loomis Sayles Growth Fund) and EQWL (Invesco S&P 100 Equal Weight ETF) are both funds - LGRRX is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund managed by Natixis, while EQWL is a Large Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the S&P 100 Equal Weight Index. Over the past 10 years, LGRRX returned 14.79%/yr vs 14.45%/yr for EQWL. Their 0.75 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. LGRRX charges 0.92%/yr vs 0.25%/yr for EQWL.

Performance

LGRRX vs. EQWL - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Loomis Sayles Growth Fund (LGRRX) and Invesco S&P 100 Equal Weight ETF (EQWL). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, LGRRX achieves a -6.55% return, which is significantly lower than EQWL's 11.12% return. Both investments have delivered pretty close results over the past 10 years, with LGRRX having a 14.79% annualized return and EQWL not far behind at 14.45%.

LGRRX

• 1D: 0.95%
• 1M: -2.48%
• 6M: -5.97%
• YTD: -6.55%
• 1Y: -1.92%
• 3Y*: 14.49%
• 5Y*: 9.73%
• 10Y*: 14.79%
• ALL TIME*: 7.90%

EQWL

• 1D: 0.07%
• 1M: -0.29%
• 6M: 8.68%
• YTD: 11.12%
• 1Y: 22.08%
• 3Y*: 17.75%
• 5Y*: 11.96%
• 10Y*: 14.45%
• ALL TIME*: 10.73%

*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)
EQWL Invesco S&P 100 Equal Weight ETF	$9.49M	$9.52M	$9.92M
LGRRX Loomis Sayles Growth Fund	$0.00	$0.00	$0.00

LGRRX vs. EQWL - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
LGRRX Loomis Sayles Growth Fund	-6.55%	13.76%	34.82%	50.89%	-28.03%	18.40%	31.40%	31.41%	-2.80%	32.29%
EQWL Invesco S&P 100 Equal Weight ETF	11.12%	17.61%	19.11%	19.48%	-11.46%	28.29%	13.94%	29.54%	-6.30%	24.41%

Correlation

The correlation between LGRRX and EQWL is 0.52, which is moderate. They have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently, sharing some price drivers without tracking each other closely.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.52
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history.	0.54
Correlation (5Y) Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period.	0.70
Correlation (10Y) Provides a long-term view across more market conditions.	0.71
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 1, 2006	0.75

Over the past year, the correlation between LGRRX and EQWL has dropped to 0.52 - well below their long-term average of 0.75, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

Return for Risk

LGRRX vs. EQWL — Risk / Return Rank

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

LGRRX

LGRRX Risk / Return Rank: 3
LGRRX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3
LGRRX Sortino Ratio Rank: 4
LGRRX Omega Ratio Rank: 4
LGRRX Calmar Ratio Rank: 4
LGRRX Martin Ratio Rank: 3

EQWL

EQWL Risk / Return Rank: 82
EQWL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 84
EQWL Sortino Ratio Rank: 83
EQWL Omega Ratio Rank: 82
EQWL Calmar Ratio Rank: 76
EQWL Martin Ratio Rank: 84

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.

LGRRX vs. EQWL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Loomis Sayles Growth Fund (LGRRX) and Invesco S&P 100 Equal Weight ETF (EQWL). 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.

	LGRRX	EQWL	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.14	1.94	-2.07
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-0.06	2.72	-2.78
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.99	1.35	-0.35
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.14	2.67	-2.80
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-0.36	11.35	-11.71

LGRRX vs. EQWL - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current LGRRX Sharpe Ratio is -0.14, which is lower than the EQWL Sharpe Ratio of 1.94. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of LGRRX and EQWL, 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

LGRRX vs. EQWL - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum LGRRX drawdown since its inception was -64.70%, which is greater than EQWL's maximum drawdown of -49.36%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LGRRX and EQWL.

Drawdown Indicators

	LGRRX	EQWL	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-64.70%	-49.36%	-15.34%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-17.93%	-7.76%	-10.17%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-27.84%	-14.95%	-12.89%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-34.85%	-22.99%	-11.86%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-34.85%	-34.30%	-0.55%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-9.70%	-0.90%	-8.80%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-21.16%	-6.65%	-14.51%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	6.41%	1.82%	+4.59%

Volatility

LGRRX vs. EQWL - Volatility Comparison

Loomis Sayles Growth Fund (LGRRX) has a higher volatility of 5.35% compared to Invesco S&P 100 Equal Weight ETF (EQWL) at 3.02%. This indicates that LGRRX's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than EQWL based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	LGRRX	EQWL	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.35%	3.02%	+2.33%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	13.83%	8.30%	+5.53%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	18.14%	10.74%	+7.40%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	23.12%	15.01%	+8.11%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	21.10%	16.71%	+4.39%

LGRRX vs. EQWL - Expense Ratio Comparison

LGRRX has a 0.92% expense ratio, which is higher than EQWL's 0.25% expense ratio.

Dividends

LGRRX vs. EQWL - Dividend Comparison

LGRRX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.68%, more than EQWL's 1.57% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
EQWL Invesco S&P 100 Equal Weight ETF	1.57%	1.67%	1.86%	1.97%	2.12%	1.65%	2.01%	2.04%	2.23%	1.27%	2.01%	2.03%
LGRRX Loomis Sayles Growth Fund	2.68%	2.50%	6.30%	6.70%	18.14%	5.13%	4.60%	2.68%	5.92%	2.33%	1.38%	0.42%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both LGRRX and EQWL in my portfolio?

LGRRX and EQWL have a correlation of 0.52, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, LGRRX or EQWL?

LGRRX has higher volatility (5.35%) compared to EQWL (3.02%). In terms of maximum drawdown, LGRRX dropped -64.70% vs EQWL's -49.36%.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

EQWL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.94 vs -0.14), 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.