MBCE vs. GRW

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

MBCE (Monarch Blue Chips Elite Index ETF) and GRW (TCW Durable Growth ETF) are both Large Cap Growth Equities funds. MBCE is passively managed, while GRW is actively managed. MBCE charges 1.14%/yr vs 0.75%/yr for GRW.

Performance

MBCE vs. GRW - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Monarch Blue Chips Elite Index ETF (MBCE) and TCW Durable Growth ETF (GRW). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

MBCE

• 1D: -1.43%
• 1M: —
• YTD: —
• 6M: —
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

GRW

• 1D: 0.18%
• 1M: —
• YTD: —
• 6M: —
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

MBCE vs. GRW - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)
MBCE Monarch Blue Chips Elite Index ETF	-1.43%
GRW TCW Durable Growth ETF	0.18%

MBCE vs. GRW - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	MBCE	GRW
Technology	42.3%	26.6%
Healthcare	13.9%	4.1%
Financial Services	11.2%	9.8%
Consumer Cyclical	10.9%	8.3%
Real Estate	7.6%	-
Communication Services	7.1%	9.1%
Industrials	3.6%	38.1%
Consumer Defensive	3.5%	-
Basic Materials	-	4.0%
Energy	-	-
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

MBCE vs. GRW - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Monarch Blue Chips Elite Index ETF (MBCE) and TCW Durable Growth ETF (GRW). 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.

Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	MBCE	GRW	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	—	13.58	—

Drawdowns

MBCE vs. GRW - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MBCE drawdown since its inception was -1.43%, which is greater than GRW's maximum drawdown of -0.45%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MBCE and GRW.

Drawdown Indicators

	MBCE	GRW	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-1.43%	-0.45%	-0.98%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.43%	-0.27%	-1.16%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.43%	-0.17%	-1.26%

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	MBCE	GRW	Difference
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	—	8.89%	—
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	—	8.89%	—
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	—	8.89%	—

MBCE vs. GRW - Expense Ratio Comparison

MBCE has a 1.14% expense ratio, which is higher than GRW's 0.75% expense ratio.

Dividends

MBCE vs. GRW - Dividend Comparison

Neither MBCE nor GRW has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Which ETF is better, MBCE or GRW?

On fees, GRW is cheaper at 0.75% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, MBCE or GRW?

GRW is cheaper with a 0.75% expense ratio, compared with 1.14% for MBCE.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, MBCE or GRW?

MBCE and GRW have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

What is the main difference between MBCE and GRW?

They also come from different issuers: Kingsview Partners LLC and TCW. Their fees differ too: 1.14% for MBCE and 0.75% for GRW.