PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
LRGF vs. GSLC
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

LRGF vs. GSLC

Last updated Jul 26, 2026
Documentation

LRGF (iShares MSCI USA Multifactor ETF) and GSLC (Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta U.S. Large Cap Equity ETF) are both Large Cap Blend Equities funds - LRGF tracks the MSCI USA Diversified Multi-Factor while GSLC tracks the Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta U.S. Large Cap Equity Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, LRGF returned 13.48%/yr vs 14.04%/yr for GSLC. Their 0.95 correlation means they have historically moved very closely together. LRGF charges 0.20%/yr vs 0.09%/yr for GSLC.

Performance

LRGF vs. GSLC - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares MSCI USA Multifactor ETF (LRGF) and Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta U.S. Large Cap Equity ETF (GSLC). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, LRGF achieves a 8.94% return, which is significantly higher than GSLC's 7.14% return. Both investments have delivered pretty close results over the past 10 years, with LRGF having a 13.48% annualized return and GSLC not far ahead at 14.04%.

LRGF

1D
0.09%
1M
1.20%
6M
8.82%
YTD
8.94%
1Y
15.34%
3Y*
19.41%
5Y*
13.20%
10Y*
13.48%
ALL TIME*
12.23%

GSLC

1D
0.26%
1M
1.27%
6M
6.47%
YTD
7.14%
1Y
14.00%
3Y*
17.71%
5Y*
11.15%
10Y*
14.04%
ALL TIME*
13.91%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Liquidity Comparison

PositionAvg. Volume Value (2W)Avg. Volume Value (1M)Avg. Volume Value (3M)

GSLC

Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta U.S. Large Cap Equity ETF
$78.02M$62.36M$41.68M

LRGF

iShares MSCI USA Multifactor ETF
$11.35M$13.93M$11.55M

LRGF vs. GSLC - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
LRGF
iShares MSCI USA Multifactor ETF		8.94%16.48%26.59%25.85%-14.77%25.01%11.11%26.11%-9.66%21.13%
GSLC
Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta U.S. Large Cap Equity ETF		7.14%16.17%24.21%25.09%-18.71%27.17%19.02%30.74%-4.07%22.49%

Correlation

The correlation between LRGF and GSLC is 0.99 - they have historically moved very closely together. At this level, their price movements offset little of one another.

Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.

0.99

Correlation (3Y)
Balances recent behavior with more history.

0.99

Correlation (5Y)
Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period.

0.99

Correlation (10Y)
Provides a long-term view across more market conditions.

0.96

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 21, 2015

0.95

The correlation between LRGF and GSLC has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.95 to 0.99 - a consistent structural relationship.

LRGF vs. GSLC - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
LRGF
GSLC

Technology

37.3%
37.8%

Financial Services

11.7%
10.9%

Consumer Cyclical

10.5%
10.3%

Communication Services

10.0%
10.2%

Healthcare

9.4%
9.1%

Industrials

8.3%
8.5%

Consumer Defensive

4.9%
5.5%

Energy

3.1%
2.9%

Utilities

2.0%
2.2%

Basic Materials

1.8%
1.4%

Real Estate

1.1%
1.2%

Technology

LRGF
37.3%
GSLC
37.8%

Financial Services

LRGF
11.7%
GSLC
10.9%

Consumer Cyclical

LRGF
10.5%
GSLC
10.3%

Communication Services

LRGF
10.0%
GSLC
10.2%

Healthcare

LRGF
9.4%
GSLC
9.1%

Industrials

LRGF
8.3%
GSLC
8.5%

Consumer Defensive

LRGF
4.9%
GSLC
5.5%

Energy

LRGF
3.1%
GSLC
2.9%

Utilities

LRGF
2.0%
GSLC
2.2%

Basic Materials

LRGF
1.8%
GSLC
1.4%

Real Estate

LRGF
1.1%
GSLC
1.2%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.

iShares MSCI USA Multifactor ETF

Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta U.S. Large Cap Equity ETF

Often compared with LRGF:
LRGF vs. VOOLRGF vs. QUALLRGF vs. INTFLRGF vs. SPYLRGF vs. FNDALRGF vs. VVLRGF vs. JQUA
Often compared with GSLC:
GSLC vs. VOOGSLC vs. SPYGSLC vs. GSUSGSLC vs. VTIGSLC vs. VLUEGSLC vs. BFFAXGSLC vs. QUAL

Return for Risk

LRGF vs. GSLC — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
LRGF
LRGF Risk / Return Rank: 5252
Overall Rank
LRGF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5252
Sharpe Ratio Rank
LRGF Sortino Ratio Rank: 5151
Sortino Ratio Rank
LRGF Omega Ratio Rank: 5050
Omega Ratio Rank
LRGF Calmar Ratio Rank: 5151
Calmar Ratio Rank
LRGF Martin Ratio Rank: 5959
Martin Ratio Rank
GSLC
GSLC Risk / Return Rank: 4848
Overall Rank
GSLC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4949
Sharpe Ratio Rank
GSLC Sortino Ratio Rank: 4747
Sortino Ratio Rank
GSLC Omega Ratio Rank: 4747
Omega Ratio Rank
GSLC Calmar Ratio Rank: 4444
Calmar Ratio Rank
GSLC Martin Ratio Rank: 5555
Martin Ratio Rank
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. GSLC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI USA Multifactor ETF (LRGF) and Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta U.S. Large Cap Equity ETF (GSLC). 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.

LRGFGSLCDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
1.25
1.18

+0.07

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
1.77
1.68

+0.09

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.22

1.21

+0.01

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.78

1.54

+0.24

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

6.95

6.49

+0.46

LRGF vs. GSLC - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current LRGF Sharpe Ratio is 1.25, which is comparable to the GSLC Sharpe Ratio of 1.18. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of LRGF and GSLC, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Loading charts...

Drawdowns

LRGF vs. GSLC - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum LRGF drawdown since its inception was -36.03%, which is greater than GSLC's maximum drawdown of -33.69%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LRGF and GSLC.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

LRGFGSLCDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-36.03%

-33.69%

-2.34%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-8.92%

-9.49%

+0.57%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-19.44%

-18.66%

-0.78%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-21.62%

-24.90%

+3.28%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-36.03%

-33.69%

-2.34%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-2.11%

-1.91%

-0.20%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-4.51%

-4.36%

-0.15%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.28%

2.24%

+0.04%

Volatility

LRGF vs. GSLC - Volatility Comparison

iShares MSCI USA Multifactor ETF (LRGF) has a higher volatility of 2.90% compared to Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta U.S. Large Cap Equity ETF (GSLC) at 2.67%. This indicates that LRGF's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than GSLC based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

LRGFGSLCDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

2.90%

2.67%

+0.23%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

9.83%

9.52%

+0.31%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

12.69%

12.31%

+0.38%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

17.07%

16.69%

+0.38%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

18.28%

17.67%

+0.61%

LRGF vs. GSLC - Expense Ratio Comparison

LRGF has a 0.20% expense ratio, which is higher than GSLC's 0.09% expense ratio. However, 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. GSLC - Dividend Comparison

LRGF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.09%, more than GSLC's 0.95% yield.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
GSLC
Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta U.S. Large Cap Equity ETF		0.95%1.00%1.11%1.38%1.61%1.06%1.35%1.54%1.89%1.69%1.69%0.36%
LRGF
iShares MSCI USA Multifactor ETF		1.09%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

With a correlation of 0.99, LRGF and GSLC 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.

LRGF has higher volatility (2.90%) compared to GSLC (2.67%). In terms of maximum drawdown, LRGF dropped -36.03% vs GSLC's -33.69%.

On 10-year performance, GSLC leads with 14.04% vs 13.48% for LRGF. On fees, GSLC is cheaper at 0.09% per year. On volatility, GSLC has been the lower-risk option at 2.67%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, GSLC has performed better with a 14.04% return vs 13.48%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

GSLC is cheaper with a 0.09% expense ratio, compared with 0.20% for LRGF.

LRGF has the higher dividend yield at 1.09%, compared with 0.95% for GSLC.

LRGF tracks MSCI USA Diversified Multi-Factor, while GSLC tracks Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta U.S. Large Cap Equity Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Goldman Sachs. Their fees differ too: 0.20% for LRGF and 0.09% for GSLC.

LRGF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.25 vs 1.18), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for LRGF and GSLC

Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.

Open Portfolio Optimizer