LRGF vs. EQL

Last updated Aug 2, 2026

LRGF (iShares U.S. Equity Factor ETF) and EQL (ALPS Equal Sector Weight ETF) are both Large Cap Blend Equities funds - LRGF tracks the STOXX U.S. Equity Factor Index while EQL tracks the NYSE Equal Sector Weight Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, LRGF returned 13.82%/yr vs 12.39%/yr for EQL. Their correlation of 0.87 means they have usually moved in the same direction. LRGF charges 0.08%/yr vs 0.27%/yr for EQL.

Performance

LRGF vs. EQL - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares U.S. Equity Factor ETF (LRGF) and ALPS Equal Sector Weight ETF (EQL). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, LRGF achieves a 10.17% return, which is significantly lower than EQL's 10.71% return. Over the past 10 years, LRGF has outperformed EQL with an annualized return of 13.82%, while EQL has yielded a comparatively lower 12.39% annualized return.

LRGF

• 1D: 0.71%
• 1M: 1.00%
• 6M: 9.84%
• YTD: 10.17%
• 1Y: 19.37%
• 3Y*: 19.82%
• 5Y*: 13.36%
• 10Y*: 13.82%
• ALL TIME*: 12.32%

EQL

• 1D: 0.57%
• 1M: 0.31%
• 6M: 6.82%
• YTD: 10.71%
• 1Y: 18.34%
• 3Y*: 14.59%
• 5Y*: 10.63%
• 10Y*: 12.39%
• ALL TIME*: 13.49%

*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)
EQL ALPS Equal Sector Weight ETF	$3.33M	$2.84M	$2.70M
LRGF iShares U.S. Equity Factor ETF	$10.71M	$10.50M	$11.75M

LRGF vs. EQL - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
LRGF iShares U.S. Equity Factor ETF	10.17%	16.48%	26.59%	25.85%	-14.77%	25.01%	11.11%	26.11%	-9.66%	21.13%
EQL ALPS Equal Sector Weight ETF	10.71%	13.09%	16.44%	16.87%	-10.72%	29.32%	10.87%	27.87%	-6.12%	18.37%

Correlation

The correlation between LRGF and EQL is 0.72, 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.	0.72
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history.	0.83
Correlation (5Y) Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period.	0.89
Correlation (10Y) Provides a long-term view across more market conditions.	0.89
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 30, 2015	0.87

The correlation between LRGF and EQL shifts across timeframes, from 0.72 (1 year) to 0.89 (10 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

LRGF vs. EQL - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	LRGF	EQL
Technology	37.3%	10.2%
Financial Services	11.7%	9.1%
Consumer Cyclical	10.5%	9.6%
Communication Services	10.0%	8.9%
Healthcare	9.4%	9.4%
Industrials	8.3%	9.3%
Consumer Defensive	4.9%	8.8%
Energy	3.1%	8.7%
Utilities	2.0%	9.4%
Basic Materials	1.8%	8.0%
Real Estate	1.1%	8.7%

Return for Risk

LRGF vs. EQL — Risk / Return Rank

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

LRGF

LRGF Risk / Return Rank: 57
LRGF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 57
LRGF Sortino Ratio Rank: 56
LRGF Omega Ratio Rank: 54
LRGF Calmar Ratio Rank: 56
LRGF Martin Ratio Rank: 64

EQL

EQL Risk / Return Rank: 79
EQL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 80
EQL Sortino Ratio Rank: 79
EQL Omega Ratio Rank: 78
EQL Calmar Ratio Rank: 78
EQL Martin Ratio Rank: 82

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.

LRGF vs. EQL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares U.S. Equity Factor ETF (LRGF) and ALPS Equal Sector Weight ETF (EQL). 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.

	LRGF	EQL	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.36	1.82	-0.46
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.91	2.54	-0.63
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.24	1.33	-0.09
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.97	2.78	-0.81
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	7.67	10.89	-3.23

LRGF vs. EQL - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current LRGF Sharpe Ratio is 1.36, which is comparable to the EQL Sharpe Ratio of 1.82. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of LRGF and EQL, 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

LRGF vs. EQL - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum LRGF drawdown since its inception was -36.03%, roughly equal to the maximum EQL drawdown of -35.65%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LRGF and EQL.

Drawdown Indicators

	LRGF	EQL	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-36.03%	-35.65%	-0.38%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-8.92%	-6.19%	-2.73%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-19.44%	-15.07%	-4.37%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-21.62%	-19.24%	-2.38%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-36.03%	-35.65%	-0.38%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.01%	-0.27%	-0.74%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-4.50%	-3.23%	-1.27%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.29%	1.58%	+0.71%

Volatility

LRGF vs. EQL - Volatility Comparison

iShares U.S. Equity Factor ETF (LRGF) has a higher volatility of 3.52% compared to ALPS Equal Sector Weight ETF (EQL) at 2.23%. This indicates that LRGF's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than EQL based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	LRGF	EQL	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.52%	2.23%	+1.29%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	10.08%	7.03%	+3.05%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	12.89%	9.50%	+3.39%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	17.09%	14.51%	+2.58%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	18.30%	16.49%	+1.81%

LRGF vs. EQL - Expense Ratio Comparison

LRGF has a 0.08% expense ratio, which is lower than EQL's 0.27% expense ratio. Despite the difference, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.

Dividends

LRGF vs. EQL - Dividend Comparison

LRGF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.08%, less than EQL's 1.35% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
EQL ALPS Equal Sector Weight ETF	1.35%	1.73%	1.78%	1.96%	2.14%	1.69%	2.29%	1.95%	2.39%	1.97%	2.89%	2.07%
LRGF iShares U.S. Equity Factor ETF	1.08%	1.16%	1.23%	1.49%	1.78%	1.05%	1.35%	1.76%	3.27%	1.68%	1.56%	0.83%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both LRGF and EQL in my portfolio?

LRGF and EQL have a correlation of 0.72, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, LRGF or EQL?

LRGF has higher volatility (3.52%) compared to EQL (2.23%). In terms of maximum drawdown, LRGF dropped -36.03% vs EQL's -35.65%.

Which ETF is better, LRGF or EQL?

On 10-year performance, LRGF leads with 13.82% vs 12.39% for EQL. On fees, LRGF is cheaper at 0.08% per year. On volatility, EQL has been the lower-risk option at 2.23%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, LRGF or EQL?

Over the 10-year period, LRGF has performed better with a 13.82% return vs 12.39%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, LRGF or EQL?

LRGF is cheaper with a 0.08% expense ratio, compared with 0.27% for EQL.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, LRGF or EQL?

EQL has the higher dividend yield at 1.35%, compared with 1.08% for LRGF.

What is the main difference between LRGF and EQL?

LRGF tracks STOXX U.S. Equity Factor Index, while EQL tracks NYSE Equal Sector Weight Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and SS&C. Their fees differ too: 0.08% for LRGF and 0.27% for EQL.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

EQL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.82 vs 1.36), 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.