MMLG vs. GRW

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

MMLG (First Trust Multi-Manager Large Growth ETF) and GRW (TCW Durable Growth ETF) are both Large Cap Growth Equities funds. Both are actively managed. Their correlation of 0.90 suggests significant overlap in exposure. MMLG charges 0.85%/yr vs 0.75%/yr for GRW.

Performance

MMLG vs. GRW - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in First Trust Multi-Manager Large Growth ETF (MMLG) and TCW Durable Growth ETF (GRW). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

MMLG

• 1D: 0.39%
• 1M: 5.53%
• YTD: 5.17%
• 6M: 3.84%
• 1Y: 15.59%
• 3Y*: 21.53%
• 5Y*: 8.42%
• 10Y*: —

GRW

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

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

MMLG vs. GRW - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)
MMLG First Trust Multi-Manager Large Growth ETF	0.17%
GRW TCW Durable Growth ETF	1.46%

Correlation

The correlation between MMLG and GRW is 0.90, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 29, 2026	0.90

MMLG vs. GRW - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	MMLG	GRW
Technology	39.5%	26.6%
Financial Services	13.2%	9.8%
Consumer Cyclical	11.8%	8.3%
Industrials	10.5%	38.1%
Healthcare	9.2%	4.1%
Communication Services	7.9%	9.1%
Consumer Defensive	2.6%	-
Basic Materials	1.3%	4.0%
Energy	1.3%	-
Utilities	1.3%	-
Real Estate	-	-

Return for Risk

MMLG vs. GRW — Risk / Return Rank

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

MMLG

MMLG Risk / Return Rank: 22
MMLG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 25
MMLG Sortino Ratio Rank: 24
MMLG Omega Ratio Rank: 24
MMLG Calmar Ratio Rank: 19
MMLG Martin Ratio Rank: 20

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.

MMLG vs. GRW - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for First Trust Multi-Manager Large Growth ETF (MMLG) 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.

	MMLG	GRW	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.86	—	—
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.26	—	—
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.16	—	—
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.79	—	—
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	2.26	—	—
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	MMLG	GRW	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.86	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.34	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.46	13.58	-13.12

Drawdowns

MMLG vs. GRW - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MMLG drawdown since its inception was -45.97%, which is greater than GRW's maximum drawdown of -0.45%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MMLG and GRW.

Drawdown Indicators

	MMLG	GRW	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-45.97%	-0.45%	-45.52%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-19.89%	—	—
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-26.57%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-45.97%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.79%	-0.27%	-1.52%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-14.35%	-0.17%	-14.18%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	6.91%	—	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	MMLG	GRW	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.35%	—	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	14.02%	—	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	18.21%	8.89%	+9.32%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	24.94%	8.89%	+16.05%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	24.53%	8.89%	+15.64%

MMLG vs. GRW - Expense Ratio Comparison

MMLG has a 0.85% expense ratio, which is higher than GRW's 0.75% expense ratio.

Dividends

MMLG vs. GRW - Dividend Comparison

Neither MMLG nor GRW has paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
GRW TCW Durable Growth ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
MMLG First Trust Multi-Manager Large Growth ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.25%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both MMLG and GRW in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.90, MMLG and GRW 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 ETF is better, MMLG 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, MMLG or GRW?

GRW is cheaper with a 0.75% expense ratio, compared with 0.85% for MMLG.

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

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

What is the main difference between MMLG and GRW?

They also come from different issuers: First Trust and TCW. Their fees differ too: 0.85% for MMLG and 0.75% for GRW.