LSGR vs. VUG

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

LSGR (Natixis Loomis Sayles Focused Growth ETF) and VUG (Vanguard Growth ETF) are both Large Cap Growth Equities funds. LSGR is actively managed, while VUG is passively managed. Over the past year, LSGR returned 12.43% vs 27.84% for VUG. Their correlation of 0.94 suggests significant overlap in exposure. LSGR charges 0.59%/yr vs 0.03%/yr for VUG.

Performance

LSGR vs. VUG - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Natixis Loomis Sayles Focused Growth ETF (LSGR) and Vanguard Growth ETF (VUG). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, LSGR achieves a -0.58% return, which is significantly lower than VUG's 9.49% return.

LSGR

• 1D: -1.55%
• 1M: 1.34%
• YTD: -0.58%
• 6M: 0.39%
• 1Y: 12.43%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

VUG

• 1D: -1.23%
• 1M: 6.22%
• YTD: 9.49%
• 6M: 8.72%
• 1Y: 27.84%
• 3Y*: 25.93%
• 5Y*: 15.11%
• 10Y*: 18.26%

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

LSGR vs. VUG - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
LSGR Natixis Loomis Sayles Focused Growth ETF	-0.58%	15.32%	38.52%	12.34%
VUG Vanguard Growth ETF	9.49%	19.40%	32.69%	11.83%

Correlation

The correlation between LSGR and VUG is 0.92, 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	0.92
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 30, 2023	0.94

The correlation between LSGR and VUG has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.92 to 0.94 - a consistent structural relationship.

LSGR vs. VUG - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	LSGR	VUG
Technology	32.1%	53.5%
Communication Services	28.3%	17.3%
Consumer Cyclical	17.4%	12.2%
Healthcare	8.9%	4.6%
Financial Services	4.8%	4.3%
Consumer Defensive	4.5%	1.5%
Industrials	4.1%	3.6%
Basic Materials	-	0.6%
Energy	-	0.4%
Real Estate	-	1.0%
Utilities	-	0.9%

Return for Risk

LSGR vs. VUG — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

LSGR

LSGR Risk / Return Rank: 20
LSGR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 22
LSGR Sortino Ratio Rank: 21
LSGR Omega Ratio Rank: 21
LSGR Calmar Ratio Rank: 18
LSGR Martin Ratio Rank: 19

VUG

VUG Risk / Return Rank: 43
VUG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 50
VUG Sortino Ratio Rank: 47
VUG Omega Ratio Rank: 48
VUG Calmar Ratio Rank: 33
VUG Martin Ratio Rank: 37

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.

LSGR vs. VUG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Natixis Loomis Sayles Focused Growth ETF (LSGR) and Vanguard Growth ETF (VUG). 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.

	LSGR	VUG	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.76	1.77	-1.00
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.13	2.40	-1.27
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.14	1.31	-0.17
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.69	1.69	-1.00
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	2.20	5.92	-3.73
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

LSGR vs. VUG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current LSGR Sharpe Ratio is 0.76, which is lower than the VUG Sharpe Ratio of 1.77. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of LSGR and VUG, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	LSGR	VUG	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.76	1.77	-1.00
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.68	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	0.85	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.08	0.62	+0.46

Drawdowns

LSGR vs. VUG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum LSGR drawdown since its inception was -22.92%, smaller than the maximum VUG drawdown of -50.68%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LSGR and VUG.

Drawdown Indicators

	LSGR	VUG	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-22.92%	-50.68%	+27.76%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-18.13%	-16.53%	-1.60%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-22.85%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-35.61%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-35.61%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-3.72%	-1.51%	-2.21%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.89%	-7.09%	+3.20%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	5.67%	4.71%	+0.96%

Volatility

LSGR vs. VUG - Volatility Comparison

Natixis Loomis Sayles Focused Growth ETF (LSGR) has a higher volatility of 4.72% compared to Vanguard Growth ETF (VUG) at 3.83%. This indicates that LSGR's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than VUG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	LSGR	VUG	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.72%	3.83%	+0.89%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	12.36%	12.11%	+0.25%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	16.39%	15.84%	+0.55%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	20.39%	22.22%	-1.83%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	20.39%	21.44%	-1.05%

LSGR vs. VUG - Expense Ratio Comparison

LSGR has a 0.59% expense ratio, which is higher than VUG's 0.03% expense ratio.

Dividends

LSGR vs. VUG - Dividend Comparison

LSGR has not paid dividends to shareholders, while VUG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.37%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
LSGR Natixis Loomis Sayles Focused Growth ETF	0.00%	0.05%	0.08%	0.03%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
VUG Vanguard Growth ETF	0.37%	0.41%	0.47%	0.58%	0.70%	0.48%	0.66%	0.95%	1.32%	1.14%	1.39%	1.30%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both LSGR and VUG in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.92, LSGR and VUG 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.

Which is riskier, LSGR or VUG?

LSGR has higher volatility (4.72%) compared to VUG (3.83%). In terms of maximum drawdown, LSGR dropped -22.92% vs VUG's -50.68%.

Which ETF is better, LSGR or VUG?

On 1-year performance, VUG leads with 27.84% vs 12.43% for LSGR. On fees, VUG is cheaper at 0.03% per year. On volatility, VUG has been the lower-risk option at 3.83%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, LSGR or VUG?

Over the 1-year period, VUG has performed better with a 27.84% return vs 12.43%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, LSGR or VUG?

VUG is cheaper with a 0.03% expense ratio, compared with 0.59% for LSGR.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, LSGR or VUG?

VUG has the higher dividend yield at 0.37%, compared with 0.00% for LSGR.

What is the main difference between LSGR and VUG?

They also come from different issuers: Natixis and Vanguard. Their fees differ too: 0.59% for LSGR and 0.03% for VUG.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

VUG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.77 vs 0.76), 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.