OALC vs. FTGS

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

OALC (OneAscent Large Cap Core ETF) and FTGS (First Trust Growth Strength ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - OALC is a Large Cap Blend Equities fund actively managed by Oneascent, while FTGS is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund tracking the The Growth Strength Index - Benchmark TR Gross. OALC is actively managed, while FTGS is passively managed. Over the past 3 years, OALC returned 23.85%/yr vs 18.88%/yr for FTGS. Their correlation of 0.89 suggests significant overlap in exposure. OALC charges 0.49%/yr vs 0.60%/yr for FTGS.

Performance

OALC vs. FTGS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in OneAscent Large Cap Core ETF (OALC) and First Trust Growth Strength ETF (FTGS). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, OALC achieves a 15.60% return, which is significantly higher than FTGS's 5.22% return.

OALC

• 1D: -0.63%
• 1M: 6.75%
• YTD: 15.60%
• 6M: 16.26%
• 1Y: 32.95%
• 3Y*: 23.85%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

FTGS

• 1D: -0.75%
• 1M: 3.43%
• YTD: 5.22%
• 6M: 5.10%
• 1Y: 12.55%
• 3Y*: 18.88%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

OALC vs. FTGS - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
OALC OneAscent Large Cap Core ETF	15.60%	20.36%	19.64%	22.03%	4.99%
FTGS First Trust Growth Strength ETF	5.22%	12.78%	15.76%	33.69%	1.09%

Correlation

The correlation between OALC and FTGS is 0.82, 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	0.82
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.87
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 27, 2022	0.89

The correlation between OALC and FTGS has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.82 to 0.89 - a consistent structural relationship.

OALC vs. FTGS - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	OALC	FTGS
Technology	37.8%	30.6%
Financial Services	14.7%	16.2%
Consumer Cyclical	11.1%	13.6%
Communication Services	8.4%	5.7%
Industrials	7.6%	12.3%
Healthcare	6.4%	17.6%
Consumer Defensive	5.3%	2.0%
Utilities	3.0%	-
Energy	2.5%	4.8%
Basic Materials	1.3%	1.9%
Real Estate	1.0%	-

Return for Risk

OALC vs. FTGS — Risk / Return Rank

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

OALC

OALC Risk / Return Rank: 79
OALC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 79
OALC Sortino Ratio Rank: 78
OALC Omega Ratio Rank: 76
OALC Calmar Ratio Rank: 78
OALC Martin Ratio Rank: 86

FTGS

FTGS Risk / Return Rank: 27
FTGS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 26
FTGS Sortino Ratio Rank: 26
FTGS Omega Ratio Rank: 24
FTGS Calmar Ratio Rank: 27
FTGS Martin Ratio Rank: 31

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.

OALC vs. FTGS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for OneAscent Large Cap Core ETF (OALC) and First Trust Growth Strength ETF (FTGS). 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.

	OALC	FTGS	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	2.56	0.94	+1.62
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	3.49	1.41	+2.08
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.45	1.17	+0.28
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.93	1.33	+2.60
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	18.19	4.51	+13.68
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

OALC vs. FTGS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current OALC Sharpe Ratio is 2.56, which is higher than the FTGS Sharpe Ratio of 0.94. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of OALC and FTGS, 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

	OALC	FTGS	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.56	0.94	+1.62
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.68	1.10	-0.42

Drawdowns

OALC vs. FTGS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum OALC drawdown since its inception was -26.82%, which is greater than FTGS's maximum drawdown of -19.99%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for OALC and FTGS.

Drawdown Indicators

	OALC	FTGS	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-26.82%	-19.99%	-6.83%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-8.42%	-9.47%	+1.05%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-17.64%	-19.99%	+2.35%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.63%	-1.66%	+1.03%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-7.04%	-2.75%	-4.29%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.82%	2.79%	-0.97%

Volatility

OALC vs. FTGS - Volatility Comparison

OneAscent Large Cap Core ETF (OALC) and First Trust Growth Strength ETF (FTGS) have volatilities of 3.42% and 3.33%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	OALC	FTGS	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.42%	3.33%	+0.09%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	9.95%	10.27%	-0.32%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	12.94%	13.45%	-0.51%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	17.28%	17.15%	+0.13%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	17.28%	17.15%	+0.13%

OALC vs. FTGS - Expense Ratio Comparison

OALC has a 0.49% expense ratio, which is lower than FTGS's 0.60% expense ratio.

Dividends

OALC vs. FTGS - Dividend Comparison

OALC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.53%, more than FTGS's 0.09% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
FTGS First Trust Growth Strength ETF	0.09%	0.16%	0.39%	0.62%	0.21%	0.00%
OALC OneAscent Large Cap Core ETF	0.53%	0.61%	0.70%	0.40%	0.40%	0.06%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both OALC and FTGS in my portfolio?

OALC and FTGS have a correlation of 0.82, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, OALC or FTGS?

OALC has higher volatility (3.42%) compared to FTGS (3.33%). In terms of maximum drawdown, OALC dropped -26.82% vs FTGS's -19.99%.

Which ETF is better, OALC or FTGS?

On 3-year performance, OALC leads with 23.85% vs 18.88% for FTGS. On fees, OALC is cheaper at 0.49% per year. Their volatility is very similar. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, OALC or FTGS?

Over the 3-year period, OALC has performed better with a 23.85% return vs 18.88%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, OALC or FTGS?

OALC is cheaper with a 0.49% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for FTGS.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, OALC or FTGS?

OALC has the higher dividend yield at 0.53%, compared with 0.09% for FTGS.

What is the main difference between OALC and FTGS?

OALC is categorized as Large Cap Blend Equities, while FTGS is Large Cap Growth Equities. They also come from different issuers: Oneascent and First Trust. Their fees differ too: 0.49% for OALC and 0.60% for FTGS.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

OALC currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.56 vs 0.94), 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.