LRGC vs. TCAF

Last updated Jun 23, 2026

LRGC (AB US Large Cap Strategic Equities ETF) and TCAF (T. Rowe Price Capital Appreciation Equity ETF) are both Large Cap Blend Equities funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, LRGC returned 22.28% vs 18.72% for TCAF. Their correlation of 0.92 suggests significant overlap in exposure. LRGC charges 0.48%/yr vs 0.31%/yr for TCAF.

Performance

LRGC vs. TCAF - Performance Comparison

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, LRGC achieves a 6.99% return, which is significantly higher than TCAF's 5.39% return.

LRGC

• 1D: -0.64%
• 1M: 0.33%
• YTD: 6.99%
• 6M: 6.94%
• 1Y: 22.28%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

TCAF

• 1D: -0.25%
• 1M: -0.40%
• YTD: 5.39%
• 6M: 5.34%
• 1Y: 18.72%
• 3Y*: 17.73%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

LRGC vs. TCAF - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
LRGC AB US Large Cap Strategic Equities ETF	6.99%	16.23%	24.92%	8.11%
TCAF T. Rowe Price Capital Appreciation Equity ETF	5.39%	15.45%	20.93%	7.91%

Correlation

The correlation between LRGC and TCAF is 0.92, 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	0.92
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 20, 2023	0.92

The correlation between LRGC and TCAF has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.92 to 0.92 - a consistent structural relationship.

LRGC vs. TCAF - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	LRGC	TCAF
Technology	34.9%	34.0%
Communication Services	13.2%	10.5%
Financial Services	12.8%	6.1%
Industrials	10.4%	4.7%
Healthcare	9.1%	17.6%
Consumer Cyclical	8.6%	12.4%
Energy	2.8%	2.6%
Consumer Defensive	2.7%	3.3%
Basic Materials	2.2%	0.1%
Utilities	1.9%	8.7%
Real Estate	1.5%	0.1%

Return for Risk

LRGC vs. TCAF — Risk / Return Rank

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

LRGC

LRGC Risk / Return Rank: 52
LRGC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 55
LRGC Sortino Ratio Rank: 53
LRGC Omega Ratio Rank: 54
LRGC Calmar Ratio Rank: 46
LRGC Martin Ratio Rank: 54

TCAF

TCAF Risk / Return Rank: 42
TCAF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 46
TCAF Sortino Ratio Rank: 44
TCAF Omega Ratio Rank: 46
TCAF Calmar Ratio Rank: 34
TCAF Martin Ratio Rank: 42

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. TCAF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for AB US Large Cap Strategic Equities ETF (LRGC) and T. Rowe Price Capital Appreciation Equity ETF (TCAF). 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.

	LRGC	TCAF	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.80	1.57	+0.23
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.48	2.17	+0.31
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.32	1.29	+0.04
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.24	1.66	+0.58
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	9.18	6.53	+2.65

LRGC vs. TCAF - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current LRGC Sharpe Ratio is 1.80, which is comparable to the TCAF Sharpe Ratio of 1.57. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of LRGC and TCAF, 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

LRGC vs. TCAF - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum LRGC drawdown since its inception was -19.38%, which is greater than TCAF's maximum drawdown of -16.37%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LRGC and TCAF.

Drawdown Indicators

	LRGC	TCAF	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-19.38%	-16.37%	-3.01%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-10.00%	-11.33%	+1.33%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-16.37%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.21%	-2.02%	+0.81%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.19%	-2.06%	-0.13%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.43%	2.87%	-0.44%

Volatility

LRGC vs. TCAF - Volatility Comparison

AB US Large Cap Strategic Equities ETF (LRGC) has a higher volatility of 4.37% compared to T. Rowe Price Capital Appreciation Equity ETF (TCAF) at 4.15%. This indicates that LRGC's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than TCAF based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	LRGC	TCAF	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.37%	4.15%	+0.22%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	9.79%	9.43%	+0.36%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	12.44%	11.99%	+0.45%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	15.28%	14.02%	+1.26%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	15.28%	14.02%	+1.26%

LRGC vs. TCAF - Expense Ratio Comparison

LRGC has a 0.48% expense ratio, which is higher than TCAF's 0.31% expense ratio.

Dividends

LRGC vs. TCAF - Dividend Comparison

LRGC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.54%, more than TCAF's 0.48% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023
LRGC AB US Large Cap Strategic Equities ETF	0.54%	0.58%	0.46%	0.17%
TCAF T. Rowe Price Capital Appreciation Equity ETF	0.48%	0.50%	0.43%	0.26%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both LRGC and TCAF in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.92, LRGC and TCAF 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, LRGC or TCAF?

LRGC has higher volatility (4.37%) compared to TCAF (4.15%). In terms of maximum drawdown, LRGC dropped -19.38% vs TCAF's -16.37%.

Which ETF is better, LRGC or TCAF?

On 1-year performance, LRGC leads with 22.28% vs 18.72% for TCAF. On fees, TCAF is cheaper at 0.31% per year. On volatility, TCAF has been the lower-risk option at 4.15%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, LRGC or TCAF?

Over the 1-year period, LRGC has performed better with a 22.28% return vs 18.72%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, LRGC or TCAF?

TCAF is cheaper with a 0.31% expense ratio, compared with 0.48% for LRGC.

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

LRGC has the higher dividend yield at 0.54%, compared with 0.48% for TCAF.

What is the main difference between LRGC and TCAF?

They also come from different issuers: AllianceBernstein and T. Rowe Price. Their fees differ too: 0.48% for LRGC and 0.31% for TCAF.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

LRGC currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.80 vs 1.57), 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.