LRGE vs. FGDL

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

LRGE (ClearBridge Large Cap Growth ESG ETF) and FGDL (Franklin Responsibly Sourced Gold ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - LRGE is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund actively managed by Franklin Templeton, while FGDL is a Precious Metals fund tracking the LBMA Gold Price PM ($/ozt). LRGE is actively managed, while FGDL is passively managed. Over the past 3 years, LRGE returned 18.98%/yr vs 31.32%/yr for FGDL. At a 0.13 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. LRGE charges 0.59%/yr vs 0.15%/yr for FGDL.

Performance

LRGE vs. FGDL - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in ClearBridge Large Cap Growth ESG ETF (LRGE) and Franklin Responsibly Sourced Gold ETF (FGDL). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, LRGE achieves a 5.35% return, which is significantly higher than FGDL's 2.43% return.

LRGE

• 1D: -1.60%
• 1M: 5.34%
• YTD: 5.35%
• 6M: 5.15%
• 1Y: 13.78%
• 3Y*: 18.98%
• 5Y*: 10.94%
• 10Y*: —

FGDL

• 1D: -1.09%
• 1M: -1.94%
• YTD: 2.43%
• 6M: 4.89%
• 1Y: 31.70%
• 3Y*: 31.32%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

LRGE vs. FGDL - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
LRGE ClearBridge Large Cap Growth ESG ETF	5.35%	9.54%	26.32%	46.36%	-0.11%
FGDL Franklin Responsibly Sourced Gold ETF	2.43%	64.15%	27.31%	12.92%	0.91%

Correlation

The correlation between LRGE and FGDL is 0.12, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.12
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.10
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 1, 2022	0.13

Return for Risk

LRGE vs. FGDL — Risk / Return Rank

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

LRGE

LRGE Risk / Return Rank: 22
LRGE Sharpe Ratio Rank: 24
LRGE Sortino Ratio Rank: 23
LRGE Omega Ratio Rank: 23
LRGE Calmar Ratio Rank: 20
LRGE Martin Ratio Rank: 21

FGDL

FGDL Risk / Return Rank: 31
FGDL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 32
FGDL Sortino Ratio Rank: 29
FGDL Omega Ratio Rank: 35
FGDL Calmar Ratio Rank: 33
FGDL Martin Ratio Rank: 28

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.

LRGE vs. FGDL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ClearBridge Large Cap Growth ESG ETF (LRGE) and Franklin Responsibly Sourced Gold ETF (FGDL). 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.

	LRGE	FGDL	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.84	1.19	-0.35
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.21	1.57	-0.36
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.15	1.24	-0.08
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.85	1.66	-0.81
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	2.50	4.03	-1.53
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

LRGE vs. FGDL - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current LRGE Sharpe Ratio is 0.84, which is comparable to the FGDL Sharpe Ratio of 1.19. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of LRGE and FGDL, 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

	LRGE	FGDL	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.84	1.19	-0.35
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.53	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.75	1.35	-0.60

Drawdowns

LRGE vs. FGDL - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum LRGE drawdown since its inception was -37.03%, which is greater than FGDL's maximum drawdown of -19.23%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LRGE and FGDL.

Drawdown Indicators

	LRGE	FGDL	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-37.03%	-19.23%	-17.80%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-16.32%	-19.23%	+2.91%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-20.26%	-19.23%	-1.03%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-37.03%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.07%	-18.16%	+16.09%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-7.20%	-3.83%	-3.37%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	5.52%	7.88%	-2.36%

Volatility

LRGE vs. FGDL - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for ClearBridge Large Cap Growth ESG ETF (LRGE) is 4.31%, while Franklin Responsibly Sourced Gold ETF (FGDL) has a volatility of 5.61%. This indicates that LRGE experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FGDL based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	LRGE	FGDL	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.31%	5.61%	-1.30%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	12.50%	23.18%	-10.68%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	16.44%	26.78%	-10.34%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	20.68%	19.03%	+1.65%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	20.61%	19.03%	+1.58%

LRGE vs. FGDL - Expense Ratio Comparison

LRGE has a 0.59% expense ratio, which is higher than FGDL's 0.15% expense ratio.

Dividends

LRGE vs. FGDL - Dividend Comparison

LRGE's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.12%, while FGDL has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
FGDL Franklin Responsibly Sourced Gold ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
LRGE ClearBridge Large Cap Growth ESG ETF	0.12%	0.13%	0.18%	0.11%	2.02%	1.20%	0.37%	0.37%	2.10%	0.37%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both LRGE and FGDL in my portfolio?

LRGE and FGDL have a correlation of 0.12, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, LRGE or FGDL?

FGDL has higher volatility (5.61%) compared to LRGE (4.31%). In terms of maximum drawdown, LRGE dropped -37.03% vs FGDL's -19.23%.

Which ETF is better, LRGE or FGDL?

On 3-year performance, FGDL leads with 31.32% vs 18.98% for LRGE. On fees, FGDL is cheaper at 0.15% per year. On volatility, LRGE has been the lower-risk option at 4.31%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, LRGE or FGDL?

Over the 3-year period, FGDL has performed better with a 31.32% return vs 18.98%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, LRGE or FGDL?

FGDL is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.59% for LRGE.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, LRGE or FGDL?

LRGE has the higher dividend yield at 0.12%, compared with 0.00% for FGDL.

What is the main difference between LRGE and FGDL?

LRGE is categorized as Large Cap Growth Equities, while FGDL is Precious Metals. Their fees differ too: 0.59% for LRGE and 0.15% for FGDL.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FGDL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.19 vs 0.84), 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.