LRGF vs. FDL

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

LRGF (iShares MSCI USA Multifactor ETF) and FDL (First Trust Morningstar Dividend Leaders Index Fund) are both exchange-traded funds - LRGF is a Large Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the MSCI USA Diversified Multi-Factor, while FDL is a Large Cap Value Equities fund tracking the Morningstar Dividend Leaders Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, LRGF returned 14.03%/yr vs 11.24%/yr for FDL. A 0.65 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. LRGF charges 0.20%/yr vs 0.45%/yr for FDL.

Performance

LRGF vs. FDL - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares MSCI USA Multifactor ETF (LRGF) and First Trust Morningstar Dividend Leaders Index Fund (FDL). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, LRGF achieves a 10.50% return, which is significantly lower than FDL's 13.33% return. Over the past 10 years, LRGF has outperformed FDL with an annualized return of 14.03%, while FDL has yielded a comparatively lower 11.24% annualized return.

LRGF

• 1D: -0.71%
• 1M: 6.20%
• YTD: 10.50%
• 6M: 10.60%
• 1Y: 24.87%
• 3Y*: 22.80%
• 5Y*: 13.83%
• 10Y*: 14.03%

FDL

• 1D: -0.26%
• 1M: -0.26%
• YTD: 13.33%
• 6M: 14.76%
• 1Y: 23.67%
• 3Y*: 18.97%
• 5Y*: 12.51%
• 10Y*: 11.24%

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

LRGF vs. FDL - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
LRGF iShares MSCI USA Multifactor ETF	10.50%	16.48%	26.59%	25.85%	-14.77%	25.01%	11.11%	26.11%	-9.66%	21.13%
FDL First Trust Morningstar Dividend Leaders Index Fund	13.33%	14.79%	17.98%	2.94%	6.66%	26.10%	-4.30%	24.41%	-5.99%	12.02%

Correlation

The correlation between LRGF and FDL is 0.19, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.19
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.41
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.57
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.65
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 1, 2015	0.65

Over the past year, the correlation between LRGF and FDL has dropped to 0.19 - well below their long-term average of 0.65, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

LRGF vs. FDL - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	LRGF	FDL
Technology	35.6%	1.1%
Financial Services	12.5%	15.1%
Consumer Cyclical	11.2%	3.8%
Healthcare	9.1%	16.8%
Communication Services	8.2%	10.6%
Industrials	8.1%	3.8%
Consumer Defensive	6.0%	14.7%
Energy	3.7%	27.3%
Utilities	2.3%	6.5%
Basic Materials	2.0%	0.3%
Real Estate	1.3%	-

Return for Risk

LRGF vs. FDL — Risk / Return Rank

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

LRGF

LRGF Risk / Return Rank: 60
LRGF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 60
LRGF Sortino Ratio Rank: 60
LRGF Omega Ratio Rank: 60
LRGF Calmar Ratio Rank: 56
LRGF Martin Ratio Rank: 63

FDL

FDL Risk / Return Rank: 70
FDL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 61
FDL Sortino Ratio Rank: 70
FDL Omega Ratio Rank: 59
FDL Calmar Ratio Rank: 90
FDL Martin Ratio Rank: 71

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.

LRGF vs. FDL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI USA Multifactor ETF (LRGF) and First Trust Morningstar Dividend Leaders Index Fund (FDL). 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.

	LRGF	FDL	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.08	2.11	-0.03
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.86	3.25	-0.39
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.37	1.37	0.00
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.80	5.56	-2.76
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	11.62	13.56	-1.93
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

LRGF vs. FDL - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current LRGF Sharpe Ratio is 2.08, which is comparable to the FDL Sharpe Ratio of 2.11. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of LRGF and FDL, 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

	LRGF	FDL	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.08	2.11	-0.03
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.82	0.88	-0.06
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.77	0.66	+0.11
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.70	0.45	+0.24

Drawdowns

LRGF vs. FDL - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum LRGF drawdown since its inception was -36.03%, smaller than the maximum FDL drawdown of -65.93%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LRGF and FDL.

Drawdown Indicators

	LRGF	FDL	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-36.03%	-65.93%	+29.90%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-8.92%	-4.27%	-4.65%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-19.44%	-12.24%	-7.20%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-21.62%	-16.46%	-5.16%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-36.03%	-41.40%	+5.37%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.71%	-2.18%	+1.47%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-4.54%	-9.66%	+5.12%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.14%	1.75%	+0.39%

Volatility

LRGF vs. FDL - Volatility Comparison

iShares MSCI USA Multifactor ETF (LRGF) and First Trust Morningstar Dividend Leaders Index Fund (FDL) have volatilities of 2.92% and 2.85%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	LRGF	FDL	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.92%	2.85%	+0.07%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	9.09%	7.87%	+1.22%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	12.06%	11.28%	+0.78%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	17.03%	14.31%	+2.72%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	18.31%	17.11%	+1.20%

LRGF vs. FDL - Expense Ratio Comparison

LRGF has a 0.20% expense ratio, which is lower than FDL's 0.45% expense ratio.

Dividends

LRGF vs. FDL - Dividend Comparison

LRGF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.06%, less than FDL's 3.68% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
FDL First Trust Morningstar Dividend Leaders Index Fund	3.68%	4.04%	4.96%	4.58%	3.58%	4.59%	4.48%	3.75%	3.97%	3.18%	2.93%	3.65%
LRGF iShares MSCI USA Multifactor ETF	1.06%	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 FDL in my portfolio?

LRGF and FDL have a correlation of 0.19, 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 FDL?

LRGF has higher volatility (2.92%) compared to FDL (2.85%). In terms of maximum drawdown, LRGF dropped -36.03% vs FDL's -65.93%.

Which ETF is better, LRGF or FDL?

On 10-year performance, LRGF leads with 14.03% vs 11.24% for FDL. On fees, LRGF is cheaper at 0.20% per year. Their volatility is very similar. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, LRGF or FDL?

Over the 10-year period, LRGF has performed better with a 14.03% return vs 11.24%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, LRGF or FDL?

LRGF is cheaper with a 0.20% expense ratio, compared with 0.45% for FDL.

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

FDL has the higher dividend yield at 3.68%, compared with 1.06% for LRGF.

What is the main difference between LRGF and FDL?

LRGF is categorized as Large Cap Blend Equities, while FDL is Large Cap Value Equities. LRGF tracks MSCI USA Diversified Multi-Factor, while FDL tracks Morningstar Dividend Leaders Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and First Trust. Their fees differ too: 0.20% for LRGF and 0.45% for FDL.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FDL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.11 vs 2.08), 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.