LRGG vs. CAOS

Last updated Aug 2, 2026

LRGG (Nomura Focused Large Growth ETF) and CAOS (Alpha Architect Tail Risk ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - LRGG is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund actively managed by Nomura, while CAOS is a Options Trading fund actively managed by Alpha Architect. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, LRGG returned -0.78% vs 1.73% for CAOS. Their -0.21 correlation means they have often moved in opposite directions in the past. LRGG charges 0.45%/yr vs 0.63%/yr for CAOS.

Performance

LRGG vs. CAOS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Nomura Focused Large Growth ETF (LRGG) and Alpha Architect Tail Risk ETF (CAOS). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, LRGG achieves a -2.31% return, which is significantly lower than CAOS's 0.76% return.

LRGG

• 1D: 1.46%
• 1M: 2.40%
• 6M: 1.42%
• YTD: -2.31%
• 1Y: -0.78%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 6.52%

CAOS

• 1D: -0.06%
• 1M: -0.01%
• 6M: 0.16%
• YTD: 0.76%
• 1Y: 1.73%
• 3Y*: 3.48%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 4.70%

*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)
CAOS Alpha Architect Tail Risk ETF	$6.81M	$5.39M	$5.09M
LRGG Nomura Focused Large Growth ETF	$839.09K	$820.26K	$1.43M

LRGG vs. CAOS - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
LRGG Nomura Focused Large Growth ETF	-2.31%	7.65%	9.34%
CAOS Alpha Architect Tail Risk ETF	0.76%	2.55%	3.99%

Correlation

The correlation between LRGG and CAOS is -0.22, meaning they have often moved in opposite directions in the past. This relationship can weaken or reverse as market conditions change.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	-0.22
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 15, 2024	-0.21

Return for Risk

LRGG vs. CAOS — Risk / Return Rank

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

LRGG

LRGG Risk / Return Rank: 8
LRGG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8
LRGG Sortino Ratio Rank: 8
LRGG Omega Ratio Rank: 8
LRGG Calmar Ratio Rank: 9
LRGG Martin Ratio Rank: 9

CAOS

CAOS Risk / Return Rank: 56
CAOS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 49
CAOS Sortino Ratio Rank: 55
CAOS Omega Ratio Rank: 54
CAOS Calmar Ratio Rank: 72
CAOS Martin Ratio Rank: 48

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.

LRGG vs. CAOS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Nomura Focused Large Growth ETF (LRGG) and Alpha Architect Tail Risk ETF (CAOS). 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.

	LRGG	CAOS	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.18	1.19	-1.37
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-0.14	1.89	-2.03
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.98	1.24	-0.26
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.14	2.47	-2.61
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-0.34	5.45	-5.79

LRGG vs. CAOS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current LRGG Sharpe Ratio is -0.18, which is lower than the CAOS Sharpe Ratio of 1.19. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of LRGG and CAOS, 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

LRGG vs. CAOS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum LRGG drawdown since its inception was -18.94%, which is greater than CAOS's maximum drawdown of -3.89%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LRGG and CAOS.

Drawdown Indicators

	LRGG	CAOS	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-18.94%	-3.89%	-15.05%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-18.94%	-0.76%	-18.18%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-3.60%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-5.49%	-1.13%	-4.36%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-4.57%	-0.92%	-3.65%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	7.93%	0.34%	+7.59%

Volatility

LRGG vs. CAOS - Volatility Comparison

Nomura Focused Large Growth ETF (LRGG) has a higher volatility of 4.65% compared to Alpha Architect Tail Risk ETF (CAOS) at 0.51%. This indicates that LRGG's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CAOS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	LRGG	CAOS	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.65%	0.51%	+4.14%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	12.23%	1.07%	+11.16%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	15.01%	1.57%	+13.44%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	16.74%	4.18%	+12.56%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	16.74%	4.18%	+12.56%

LRGG vs. CAOS - Expense Ratio Comparison

LRGG has a 0.45% expense ratio, which is lower than CAOS's 0.63% expense ratio.

Dividends

LRGG vs. CAOS - Dividend Comparison

LRGG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.16%, while CAOS has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024
CAOS Alpha Architect Tail Risk ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
LRGG Nomura Focused Large Growth ETF	0.16%	0.16%	0.13%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both LRGG and CAOS in my portfolio?

LRGG and CAOS have a correlation of -0.22, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, LRGG or CAOS?

LRGG has higher volatility (4.65%) compared to CAOS (0.51%). In terms of maximum drawdown, LRGG dropped -18.94% vs CAOS's -3.89%.

Which ETF is better, LRGG or CAOS?

On 1-year performance, CAOS leads with 1.73% vs -0.78% for LRGG. On fees, LRGG is cheaper at 0.45% per year. On volatility, CAOS has been the lower-risk option at 0.51%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, LRGG or CAOS?

Over the 1-year period, CAOS has performed better with a 1.73% return vs -0.78%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, LRGG or CAOS?

LRGG is cheaper with a 0.45% expense ratio, compared with 0.63% for CAOS.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, LRGG or CAOS?

LRGG has the higher dividend yield at 0.16%, compared with 0.00% for CAOS.

What is the main difference between LRGG and CAOS?

LRGG is categorized as Large Cap Growth Equities, while CAOS is Options Trading. They also come from different issuers: Nomura and Alpha Architect. Their fees differ too: 0.45% for LRGG and 0.63% for CAOS.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

CAOS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.19 vs -0.18), 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.