LRGC vs. LOWV

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

LRGC (AB US Large Cap Strategic Equities ETF) and LOWV (AB US Low Volatility Equity ETF) are both Large Cap Blend Equities funds from AllianceBernstein. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, LRGC returned 23.67% vs 10.86% for LOWV. Their correlation of 0.89 suggests significant overlap in exposure. Both charge a 0.48% expense ratio.

Performance

LRGC vs. LOWV - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in AB US Large Cap Strategic Equities ETF (LRGC) and AB US Low Volatility Equity ETF (LOWV). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, LRGC achieves a 7.44% return, which is significantly higher than LOWV's 2.73% return.

LRGC

• 1D: -0.67%
• 1M: 3.05%
• YTD: 7.44%
• 6M: 7.71%
• 1Y: 23.67%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

LOWV

• 1D: -0.83%
• 1M: 0.85%
• YTD: 2.73%
• 6M: 2.69%
• 1Y: 10.86%
• 3Y*: 15.49%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

LRGC vs. LOWV - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
LRGC AB US Large Cap Strategic Equities ETF	7.44%	16.23%	24.92%	9.30%
LOWV AB US Low Volatility Equity ETF	2.73%	12.26%	20.43%	7.33%

Correlation

The correlation between LRGC and LOWV is 0.86, 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	0.86
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 21, 2023	0.89

The correlation between LRGC and LOWV has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.86 to 0.89 - a consistent structural relationship.

LRGC vs. LOWV - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	LRGC	LOWV
Technology	34.0%	32.6%
Communication Services	13.2%	9.7%
Financial Services	12.9%	14.9%
Industrials	8.9%	7.4%
Healthcare	8.8%	11.4%
Consumer Cyclical	8.7%	9.4%
Utilities	3.4%	4.8%
Energy	2.8%	2.4%
Consumer Defensive	2.8%	5.5%
Basic Materials	2.1%	-
Real Estate	1.5%	1.8%

Return for Risk

LRGC vs. LOWV — Risk / Return Rank

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

LRGC

LRGC Risk / Return Rank: 57
LRGC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 60
LRGC Sortino Ratio Rank: 59
LRGC Omega Ratio Rank: 59
LRGC Calmar Ratio Rank: 49
LRGC Martin Ratio Rank: 57

LOWV

LOWV Risk / Return Rank: 28
LOWV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 28
LOWV Sortino Ratio Rank: 27
LOWV Omega Ratio Rank: 27
LOWV Calmar Ratio Rank: 24
LOWV Martin Ratio Rank: 31

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.

LRGC vs. LOWV - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for AB US Large Cap Strategic Equities ETF (LRGC) and AB US Low Volatility Equity ETF (LOWV). 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.

	LRGC	LOWV	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.00	1.04	+0.96
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.77	1.50	+1.28
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.36	1.18	+0.18
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.38	1.14	+1.24
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	9.89	4.65	+5.24
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

LRGC vs. LOWV - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current LRGC Sharpe Ratio is 2.00, which is higher than the LOWV Sharpe Ratio of 1.04. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of LRGC and LOWV, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	LRGC	LOWV	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.00	1.04	+0.96
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.45	1.47	-0.02

Drawdowns

LRGC vs. LOWV - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum LRGC drawdown since its inception was -19.38%, which is greater than LOWV's maximum drawdown of -13.87%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LRGC and LOWV.

Drawdown Indicators

	LRGC	LOWV	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-19.38%	-13.87%	-5.51%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-10.00%	-9.59%	-0.41%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-13.87%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.67%	-0.95%	+0.28%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.15%	-1.50%	-0.65%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.40%	2.34%	+0.06%

Volatility

LRGC vs. LOWV - Volatility Comparison

AB US Large Cap Strategic Equities ETF (LRGC) has a higher volatility of 2.91% compared to AB US Low Volatility Equity ETF (LOWV) at 2.17%. This indicates that LRGC's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than LOWV based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	LRGC	LOWV	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.91%	2.17%	+0.74%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	9.09%	7.89%	+1.20%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	11.88%	10.47%	+1.41%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	15.20%	11.95%	+3.25%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	15.20%	11.95%	+3.25%

LRGC vs. LOWV - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both LRGC and LOWV have an expense ratio of 0.48%.

Dividends

LRGC vs. LOWV - Dividend Comparison

LRGC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.54%, less than LOWV's 0.91% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023
LOWV AB US Low Volatility Equity ETF	0.91%	0.85%	0.92%	0.77%
LRGC AB US Large Cap Strategic Equities ETF	0.54%	0.58%	0.46%	0.17%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both LRGC and LOWV in my portfolio?

LRGC and LOWV have a correlation of 0.86, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, LRGC or LOWV?

LRGC has higher volatility (2.91%) compared to LOWV (2.17%). In terms of maximum drawdown, LRGC dropped -19.38% vs LOWV's -13.87%.

Which ETF is better, LRGC or LOWV?

On 1-year performance, LRGC leads with 23.67% vs 10.86% for LOWV. Both ETFs have the same 0.48% expense ratio. On volatility, LOWV has been the lower-risk option at 2.17%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, LRGC or LOWV?

Over the 1-year period, LRGC has performed better with a 23.67% return vs 10.86%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, LRGC or LOWV?

LRGC and LOWV have the same expense ratio: 0.48% per year.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, LRGC or LOWV?

LOWV has the higher dividend yield at 0.91%, compared with 0.54% for LRGC.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

LRGC currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.00 vs 1.04), 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.