LRGG vs. VV
LRGG (Nomura Focused Large Growth ETF) and VV (Vanguard Large-Cap ETF) are both Large Cap Growth Equities funds. LRGG is actively managed, while VV is passively managed. Over the past year, LRGG returned 2.57% vs 28.29% for VV. Their correlation of 0.86 suggests significant overlap in exposure. LRGG charges 0.45%/yr vs 0.04%/yr for VV.
Performance
LRGG vs. VV - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, LRGG achieves a -3.89% return, which is significantly lower than VV's 11.16% return.
LRGG
- 1D
- 1.68%
- 1M
- 2.52%
- YTD
- -3.89%
- 6M
- -3.15%
- 1Y
- 2.57%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
VV
- 1D
- 0.42%
- 1M
- 4.83%
- YTD
- 11.16%
- 6M
- 10.98%
- 1Y
- 28.29%
- 3Y*
- 22.94%
- 5Y*
- 13.64%
- 10Y*
- 15.57%
LRGG vs. VV - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | |
|---|---|---|---|
LRGG Nomura Focused Large Growth ETF | -3.89% | 7.65% | 8.81% |
VV Vanguard Large-Cap ETF | 11.16% | 18.11% | 12.02% |
Correlation
The correlation between LRGG and VV is 0.81, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.81 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 16, 2024 | 0.86 |
The correlation between LRGG and VV has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.81 to 0.86 - a consistent structural relationship.
LRGG vs. VV - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
LRGG
VV
Technology
Financial Services
Industrials
Healthcare
Consumer Cyclical
Communication Services
Consumer Defensive
Real Estate
Basic Materials
-
Energy
-
Utilities
-
Technology
LRGG
VV
Financial Services
LRGG
VV
Industrials
LRGG
VV
Healthcare
LRGG
VV
Consumer Cyclical
LRGG
VV
Communication Services
LRGG
VV
Consumer Defensive
LRGG
VV
Real Estate
LRGG
VV
Basic Materials
LRGG
-
VV
Energy
LRGG
-
VV
Utilities
LRGG
-
VV
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. VV — Risk / Return Rank
LRGG
VV
LRGG vs. VV - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Nomura Focused Large Growth ETF (LRGG) and Vanguard Large-Cap ETF (VV). 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.
| LRGG | VV | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -2.18 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -2.89 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.04 | 1.43 | -0.38 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.14 | 3.09 | -2.95 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 0.36 | 14.11 | -13.75 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| LRGG | VV | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.19 | 2.37 | -2.18 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | — | 0.80 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | — | 0.86 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.36 | 0.60 | -0.24 |
Drawdowns
LRGG vs. VV - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum LRGG drawdown since its inception was -18.94%, smaller than the maximum VV drawdown of -54.81%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LRGG and VV.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| LRGG | VV | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -18.94% | -54.81% | +35.87% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -18.94% | -9.21% | -9.73% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -18.97% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -25.66% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -34.28% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -7.02% | -0.30% | -6.72% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -4.26% | -6.84% | +2.58% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 7.11% | 2.01% | +5.10% |
Volatility
LRGG vs. VV - Volatility Comparison
Nomura Focused Large Growth ETF (LRGG) has a higher volatility of 4.39% compared to Vanguard Large-Cap ETF (VV) at 2.79%. This indicates that LRGG's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than VV based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| LRGG | VV | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 4.39% | 2.79% | +1.60% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 11.07% | 8.99% | +2.08% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 13.78% | 11.99% | +1.79% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 16.67% | 17.22% | -0.55% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 16.67% | 18.19% | -1.52% |
LRGG vs. VV - Expense Ratio Comparison
LRGG has a 0.45% expense ratio, which is higher than VV's 0.04% expense ratio.
Dividends
LRGG vs. VV - Dividend Comparison
LRGG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.16%, less than VV's 0.97% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
LRGG Nomura Focused Large Growth ETF | 0.16% | 0.16% | 0.13% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
VV Vanguard Large-Cap ETF | 0.97% | 1.08% | 1.24% | 1.41% | 1.66% | 1.19% | 1.46% | 1.81% | 2.09% | 1.75% | 1.98% | 1.96% |
Frequently Asked Questions
LRGG and VV have a correlation of 0.81, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
LRGG has higher volatility (4.39%) compared to VV (2.79%). In terms of maximum drawdown, LRGG dropped -18.94% vs VV's -54.81%.
On 1-year performance, VV leads with 28.29% vs 2.57% for LRGG. On fees, VV is cheaper at 0.04% per year. On volatility, VV has been the lower-risk option at 2.79%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, VV has performed better with a 28.29% return vs 2.57%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
VV is cheaper with a 0.04% expense ratio, compared with 0.45% for LRGG.
VV has the higher dividend yield at 0.97%, compared with 0.16% for LRGG.
They also come from different issuers: Nomura and Vanguard. Their fees differ too: 0.45% for LRGG and 0.04% for VV.
VV currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.37 vs 0.19), 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 VV
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