LRGG vs. CSHP
LRGG (Nomura Focused Large Growth ETF) and CSHP (iShares Enhanced Short-Term Bond Active ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - LRGG is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund actively managed by Nomura, while CSHP is a Ultrashort Bond fund actively managed by iShares. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, LRGG returned -1.59% vs 3.96% for CSHP. At a 0.01 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. LRGG charges 0.45%/yr vs 0.20%/yr for CSHP.
Performance
LRGG vs. CSHP - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, LRGG achieves a -8.45% return, which is significantly lower than CSHP's 1.86% return.
LRGG
- 1D
- -1.68%
- 1M
- -3.66%
- YTD
- -8.45%
- 6M
- -8.24%
- 1Y
- -1.59%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
CSHP
- 1D
- -0.01%
- 1M
- 0.30%
- YTD
- 1.86%
- 6M
- 1.93%
- 1Y
- 3.96%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
LRGG vs. CSHP - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | |
|---|---|---|---|
LRGG Nomura Focused Large Growth ETF | -8.45% | 7.65% | 2.76% |
CSHP iShares Enhanced Short-Term Bond Active ETF | 1.86% | 4.10% | 2.24% |
Correlation
The correlation between LRGG and CSHP is -0.13, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | -0.13 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 18, 2024 | 0.01 |
The correlation between LRGG and CSHP shifts across timeframes, from -0.13 (1 year) to 0.01 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
Return for Risk
LRGG vs. CSHP — Risk / Return Rank
LRGG
CSHP
LRGG vs. CSHP - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Nomura Focused Large Growth ETF (LRGG) and iShares Enhanced Short-Term Bond Active ETF (CSHP). 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 | CSHP | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -11.33 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -28.36 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 0.99 | 6.67 | -5.68 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.08 | 65.84 | -65.93 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -0.22 | 395.75 | -395.97 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
LRGG vs. CSHP - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum LRGG drawdown since its inception was -18.94%, which is greater than CSHP's maximum drawdown of -0.08%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LRGG and CSHP.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| LRGG | CSHP | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -18.94% | -0.08% | -18.86% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -18.94% | -0.06% | -18.88% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -11.43% | -0.01% | -11.42% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -4.37% | -0.00% | -4.37% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 7.40% | 0.01% | +7.39% |
Volatility
LRGG vs. CSHP - Volatility Comparison
Nomura Focused Large Growth ETF (LRGG) has a higher volatility of 5.54% compared to iShares Enhanced Short-Term Bond Active ETF (CSHP) at 0.15%. This indicates that LRGG's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CSHP based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| LRGG | CSHP | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 5.54% | 0.15% | +5.39% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 11.75% | 0.27% | +11.48% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 14.27% | 0.36% | +13.91% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 16.74% | 0.41% | +16.33% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 16.74% | 0.41% | +16.33% |
LRGG vs. CSHP - Expense Ratio Comparison
LRGG has a 0.45% expense ratio, which is higher than CSHP's 0.20% expense ratio.
Dividends
LRGG vs. CSHP - Dividend Comparison
LRGG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.17%, less than CSHP's 3.91% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 |
|---|---|---|---|
CSHP iShares Enhanced Short-Term Bond Active ETF | 3.91% | 5.39% | 1.96% |
LRGG Nomura Focused Large Growth ETF | 0.17% | 0.16% | 0.13% |
Frequently Asked Questions
LRGG and CSHP have a correlation of -0.13, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
LRGG has higher volatility (5.54%) compared to CSHP (0.15%). In terms of maximum drawdown, LRGG dropped -18.94% vs CSHP's -0.08%.
On 1-year performance, CSHP leads with 3.96% vs -1.59% for LRGG. On fees, CSHP is cheaper at 0.20% per year. On volatility, CSHP has been the lower-risk option at 0.15%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, CSHP has performed better with a 3.96% return vs -1.59%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
CSHP is cheaper with a 0.20% expense ratio, compared with 0.45% for LRGG.
CSHP has the higher dividend yield at 3.91%, compared with 0.17% for LRGG.
LRGG is categorized as Large Cap Growth Equities, while CSHP is Ultrashort Bond. They also come from different issuers: Nomura and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.45% for LRGG and 0.20% for CSHP.
CSHP currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (11.22 vs -0.11), 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.
Find the right allocation for LRGG and CSHP
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