LRGG vs. FMTM

Last updated Aug 2, 2026

LRGG (Nomura Focused Large Growth ETF) and FMTM (MarketDesk Focused U.S. Momentum ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - LRGG is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund actively managed by Nomura, while FMTM is a Momentum fund. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, LRGG returned -0.78% vs 43.74% for FMTM. Their 0.40 correlation means their historical movements had little consistent relationship. Both charge a 0.45% expense ratio.

Performance

LRGG vs. FMTM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Nomura Focused Large Growth ETF (LRGG) and MarketDesk Focused U.S. Momentum ETF (FMTM). 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 FMTM's 19.49% return.

LRGG

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

FMTM

• 1D: 1.16%
• 1M: -5.35%
• 6M: 9.00%
• YTD: 19.49%
• 1Y: 43.74%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 36.73%

*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)
FMTM MarketDesk Focused U.S. Momentum ETF	$7.27M	$8.73M	$9.00M
LRGG Nomura Focused Large Growth ETF	$839.09K	$820.26K	$1.43M

LRGG vs. FMTM - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
LRGG Nomura Focused Large Growth ETF	-2.31%	12.08%
FMTM MarketDesk Focused U.S. Momentum ETF	19.49%	28.21%

Correlation

The correlation between LRGG and FMTM is 0.38, which is low. Their historical price movements had little consistent relationship.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.38
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 20, 2025	0.40

Return for Risk

LRGG vs. FMTM — 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

FMTM

FMTM Risk / Return Rank: 70
FMTM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 70
FMTM Sortino Ratio Rank: 64
FMTM Omega Ratio Rank: 63
FMTM Calmar Ratio Rank: 78
FMTM Martin Ratio Rank: 76

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. FMTM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Nomura Focused Large Growth ETF (LRGG) and MarketDesk Focused U.S. Momentum ETF (FMTM). 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	FMTM	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.18	1.58	-1.76
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-0.14	2.09	-2.24
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.98	1.27	-0.28
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.14	2.73	-2.87
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-0.34	9.51	-9.85

LRGG vs. FMTM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current LRGG Sharpe Ratio is -0.18, which is lower than the FMTM Sharpe Ratio of 1.58. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of LRGG and FMTM, 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. FMTM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum LRGG drawdown since its inception was -18.94%, which is greater than FMTM's maximum drawdown of -15.40%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LRGG and FMTM.

Drawdown Indicators

	LRGG	FMTM	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-18.94%	-15.40%	-3.54%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-18.94%	-15.40%	-3.54%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-5.49%	-12.01%	+6.52%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-4.57%	-2.42%	-2.15%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	7.93%	4.42%	+3.51%

Volatility

LRGG vs. FMTM - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Nomura Focused Large Growth ETF (LRGG) is 4.65%, while MarketDesk Focused U.S. Momentum ETF (FMTM) has a volatility of 9.67%. This indicates that LRGG experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FMTM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	LRGG	FMTM	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.65%	9.67%	-5.02%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	12.23%	21.17%	-8.94%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	15.01%	26.61%	-11.60%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	16.74%	24.76%	-8.02%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	16.74%	24.76%	-8.02%

LRGG vs. FMTM - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both LRGG and FMTM have an expense ratio of 0.45%.

Dividends

LRGG vs. FMTM - Dividend Comparison

LRGG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.16%, less than FMTM's 0.25% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024
FMTM MarketDesk Focused U.S. Momentum ETF	0.25%	0.30%	0.00%
LRGG Nomura Focused Large Growth ETF	0.16%	0.16%	0.13%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both LRGG and FMTM in my portfolio?

LRGG and FMTM have a correlation of 0.38, 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 FMTM?

FMTM has higher volatility (9.67%) compared to LRGG (4.65%). In terms of maximum drawdown, LRGG dropped -18.94% vs FMTM's -15.40%.

Which ETF is better, LRGG or FMTM?

On 1-year performance, FMTM leads with 43.74% vs -0.78% for LRGG. Both ETFs have the same 0.45% expense ratio. On volatility, LRGG has been the lower-risk option at 4.65%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, LRGG or FMTM?

Over the 1-year period, FMTM has performed better with a 43.74% 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 FMTM?

LRGG and FMTM have the same expense ratio: 0.45% per year.

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

FMTM has the higher dividend yield at 0.25%, compared with 0.16% for LRGG.

What is the main difference between LRGG and FMTM?

LRGG is categorized as Large Cap Growth Equities, while FMTM is Momentum.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FMTM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.58 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.