MGEMX vs. TRLGX

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

MGEMX (Morgan Stanley Institutional Fund, Inc. Emerging Markets Portfolio) and TRLGX (T. Rowe Price Large-Cap Growth Fund) are both mutual funds - MGEMX is a Emerging Markets Diversified fund managed by T. Rowe Price, while TRLGX is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund managed by T. Rowe Price. Over the past 10 years, MGEMX returned 4.16%/yr vs 18.24%/yr for TRLGX. A 0.63 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. MGEMX charges 1.05%/yr vs 0.55%/yr for TRLGX.

Performance

MGEMX vs. TRLGX - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Morgan Stanley Institutional Fund, Inc. Emerging Markets Portfolio (MGEMX) and T. Rowe Price Large-Cap Growth Fund (TRLGX). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, MGEMX achieves a 35.97% return, which is significantly higher than TRLGX's 3.32% return. Over the past 10 years, MGEMX has underperformed TRLGX with an annualized return of 4.16%, while TRLGX has yielded a comparatively higher 18.24% annualized return.

MGEMX

• 1D: -0.78%
• 1M: 10.86%
• YTD: 35.97%
• 6M: -30.76%
• 1Y: -18.87%
• 3Y*: 1.34%
• 5Y*: -5.10%
• 10Y*: 4.16%

TRLGX

• 1D: -1.71%
• 1M: 3.23%
• YTD: 3.32%
• 6M: 2.73%
• 1Y: 17.88%
• 3Y*: 24.67%
• 5Y*: 12.21%
• 10Y*: 18.24%

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

MGEMX vs. TRLGX - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
MGEMX Morgan Stanley Institutional Fund, Inc. Emerging Markets Portfolio	35.97%	-34.08%	8.07%	12.16%	-25.07%	3.53%	14.59%	37.21%	-17.34%	34.98%
TRLGX T. Rowe Price Large-Cap Growth Fund	3.32%	17.51%	37.57%	46.22%	-35.26%	23.24%	39.57%	28.51%	4.35%	37.77%

Correlation

The correlation between MGEMX and TRLGX is 0.60, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.60
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.57
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.63
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.64
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 1, 2001	0.63

The correlation between MGEMX and TRLGX has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.57 to 0.64 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

MGEMX vs. TRLGX — Risk / Return Rank

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

MGEMX

MGEMX Risk / Return Rank: 2
MGEMX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2
MGEMX Sortino Ratio Rank: 3
MGEMX Omega Ratio Rank: 3
MGEMX Calmar Ratio Rank: 1
MGEMX Martin Ratio Rank: 2

TRLGX

TRLGX Risk / Return Rank: 15
TRLGX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 18
TRLGX Sortino Ratio Rank: 17
TRLGX Omega Ratio Rank: 16
TRLGX Calmar Ratio Rank: 11
TRLGX Martin Ratio Rank: 11

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.

MGEMX vs. TRLGX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Morgan Stanley Institutional Fund, Inc. Emerging Markets Portfolio (MGEMX) and T. Rowe Price Large-Cap Growth Fund (TRLGX). 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.

	MGEMX	TRLGX	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.33	1.21	-1.53
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.05	1.71	-1.66
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.02	1.21	-0.19
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.34	1.04	-1.38
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-0.60	3.29	-3.89
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

MGEMX vs. TRLGX - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MGEMX Sharpe Ratio is -0.33, which is lower than the TRLGX Sharpe Ratio of 1.21. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MGEMX and TRLGX, 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

	MGEMX	TRLGX	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.33	1.21	-1.53
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	-0.18	0.55	-0.73
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.17	0.84	-0.67
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.31	0.58	-0.26

Drawdowns

MGEMX vs. TRLGX - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MGEMX drawdown since its inception was -64.93%, which is greater than TRLGX's maximum drawdown of -55.56%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MGEMX and TRLGX.

Drawdown Indicators

	MGEMX	TRLGX	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-64.93%	-55.56%	-9.37%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-52.50%	-18.18%	-34.32%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-52.50%	-21.17%	-31.33%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-52.50%	-40.44%	-12.06%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-52.50%	-40.44%	-12.06%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-32.33%	-2.60%	-29.73%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-19.82%	-8.68%	-11.14%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	29.89%	5.73%	+24.16%

Volatility

MGEMX vs. TRLGX - Volatility Comparison

Morgan Stanley Institutional Fund, Inc. Emerging Markets Portfolio (MGEMX) has a higher volatility of 8.84% compared to T. Rowe Price Large-Cap Growth Fund (TRLGX) at 3.80%. This indicates that MGEMX's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than TRLGX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	MGEMX	TRLGX	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	8.84%	3.80%	+5.04%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	73.57%	12.46%	+61.11%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	54.95%	15.68%	+39.27%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	28.98%	22.39%	+6.59%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	24.71%	21.76%	+2.95%

MGEMX vs. TRLGX - Expense Ratio Comparison

MGEMX has a 1.05% expense ratio, which is higher than TRLGX's 0.55% expense ratio.

Dividends

MGEMX vs. TRLGX - Dividend Comparison

MGEMX has not paid dividends to shareholders, while TRLGX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 13.25%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
MGEMX Morgan Stanley Institutional Fund, Inc. Emerging Markets Portfolio	0.00%	0.00%	1.27%	2.48%	4.48%	9.05%	1.07%	26.00%	2.46%	0.60%	0.82%	0.87%
TRLGX T. Rowe Price Large-Cap Growth Fund	13.25%	13.69%	9.80%	2.04%	3.88%	2.56%	0.42%	4.09%	7.93%	9.27%	1.64%	4.71%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both MGEMX and TRLGX in my portfolio?

MGEMX and TRLGX have a correlation of 0.60, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, MGEMX or TRLGX?

MGEMX has higher volatility (8.84%) compared to TRLGX (3.80%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MGEMX dropped -64.93% vs TRLGX's -55.56%.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

TRLGX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.21 vs -0.33), 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.