PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
MSSMX vs. VRTGX
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

MSSMX vs. VRTGX - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Morgan Stanley Institutional Inception Fund Class A (MSSMX) and Vanguard Russell 2000 Growth Index Fund Institutional Shares (VRTGX). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, MSSMX achieves a 6.52% return, which is significantly lower than VRTGX's 18.61% return. Over the past 10 years, MSSMX has outperformed VRTGX with an annualized return of 16.25%, while VRTGX has yielded a comparatively lower 11.44% annualized return.


MSSMX

1D
1.35%
1M
3.58%
YTD
6.52%
6M
-0.44%
1Y
8.05%
3Y*
17.14%
5Y*
-7.96%
10Y*
16.25%

VRTGX

1D
1.51%
1M
2.40%
YTD
18.61%
6M
16.09%
1Y
39.67%
3Y*
19.22%
5Y*
6.03%
10Y*
11.44%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

MSSMX vs. VRTGX - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
MSSMX
Morgan Stanley Institutional Inception Fund Class A
6.52%0.76%29.15%54.22%-59.57%-4.29%149.49%77.58%-0.03%22.42%
VRTGX
Vanguard Russell 2000 Growth Index Fund Institutional Shares
18.61%12.97%15.26%18.80%-26.30%2.82%34.81%28.84%-9.21%22.27%

Correlation

The correlation between MSSMX and VRTGX 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 (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.82

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.84

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.82

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 23, 2010

0.84

The correlation between MSSMX and VRTGX has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.81 to 0.84 - a consistent structural relationship.

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

MSSMX vs. VRTGX — Risk / Return Rank

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

MSSMX
MSSMX Risk / Return Rank: 44
Overall Rank
MSSMX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 44
Sharpe Ratio Rank
MSSMX Sortino Ratio Rank: 55
Sortino Ratio Rank
MSSMX Omega Ratio Rank: 55
Omega Ratio Rank
MSSMX Calmar Ratio Rank: 44
Calmar Ratio Rank
MSSMX Martin Ratio Rank: 44
Martin Ratio Rank

VRTGX
VRTGX Risk / Return Rank: 4444
Overall Rank
VRTGX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4444
Sharpe Ratio Rank
VRTGX Sortino Ratio Rank: 4040
Sortino Ratio Rank
VRTGX Omega Ratio Rank: 3636
Omega Ratio Rank
VRTGX Calmar Ratio Rank: 5353
Calmar Ratio Rank
VRTGX Martin Ratio Rank: 4848
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

MSSMX vs. VRTGX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Morgan Stanley Institutional Inception Fund Class A (MSSMX) and Vanguard Russell 2000 Growth Index Fund Institutional Shares (VRTGX). 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.


MSSMXVRTGXDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-1.62

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-2.01

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.06

1.30

-0.24

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

0.22

2.69

-2.47

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

0.46

9.68

-9.22

MSSMX vs. VRTGX - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MSSMX Sharpe Ratio is 0.24, which is lower than the VRTGX Sharpe Ratio of 1.86. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MSSMX and VRTGX, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


MSSMXVRTGXDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.24

1.86

-1.62

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

-0.21

0.25

-0.46

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.47

0.47

+0.01

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.39

0.52

-0.13

Drawdowns

MSSMX vs. VRTGX - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MSSMX drawdown since its inception was -76.24%, which is greater than VRTGX's maximum drawdown of -41.97%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MSSMX and VRTGX.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


MSSMXVRTGXDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-76.24%

-41.97%

-34.27%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-32.92%

-14.80%

-18.12%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-32.92%

-28.54%

-4.38%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-73.30%

-40.48%

-32.82%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-76.24%

-41.97%

-34.27%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-46.80%

0.00%

-46.80%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-24.60%

-10.43%

-14.17%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

15.42%

4.10%

+11.32%

Volatility

MSSMX vs. VRTGX - Volatility Comparison

Morgan Stanley Institutional Inception Fund Class A (MSSMX) has a higher volatility of 9.53% compared to Vanguard Russell 2000 Growth Index Fund Institutional Shares (VRTGX) at 6.51%. This indicates that MSSMX's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than VRTGX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


MSSMXVRTGXDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

9.53%

6.51%

+3.02%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

22.52%

15.87%

+6.65%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

29.92%

21.41%

+8.51%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

37.89%

24.56%

+13.33%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

34.32%

24.51%

+9.81%

MSSMX vs. VRTGX - Expense Ratio Comparison

MSSMX has a 1.35% expense ratio, which is higher than VRTGX's 0.08% expense ratio.


Dividends

MSSMX vs. VRTGX - Dividend Comparison

MSSMX has not paid dividends to shareholders, while VRTGX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.60%.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
MSSMX
Morgan Stanley Institutional Inception Fund Class A
0.00%0.00%1.16%0.00%0.14%36.28%13.10%45.60%18.04%57.39%3.76%9.73%
VRTGX
Vanguard Russell 2000 Growth Index Fund Institutional Shares
0.60%0.57%0.62%0.85%0.78%0.54%0.53%0.90%0.85%0.75%1.07%0.84%

Frequently Asked Questions


MSSMX and VRTGX 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.

MSSMX has higher volatility (9.53%) compared to VRTGX (6.51%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MSSMX dropped -76.24% vs VRTGX's -41.97%.

VRTGX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.86 vs 0.24), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for MSSMX and VRTGX

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