RSMV vs. GRW

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

RSMV (Relative Strength Managed Volatility Strategy ETF) and GRW (TCW Durable Growth ETF) are both Large Cap Growth Equities funds. Both are actively managed. At a 0.10 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. RSMV charges 0.95%/yr vs 0.75%/yr for GRW.

Performance

RSMV vs. GRW - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Relative Strength Managed Volatility Strategy ETF (RSMV) and TCW Durable Growth ETF (GRW). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

RSMV

• 1D: 0.25%
• 1M: 6.55%
• YTD: 9.21%
• 6M: 9.78%
• 1Y: 25.51%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

GRW

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

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

RSMV vs. GRW - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)
RSMV Relative Strength Managed Volatility Strategy ETF	1.29%
GRW TCW Durable Growth ETF	1.46%

Correlation

The correlation between RSMV and GRW is 0.10, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 29, 2026	0.10

RSMV vs. GRW - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	RSMV	GRW
Technology	34.7%	26.6%
Financial Services	33.9%	9.8%
Consumer Defensive	9.8%	-
Consumer Cyclical	5.4%	8.3%
Communication Services	5.1%	9.1%
Energy	5.0%	-
Utilities	2.8%	-
Industrials	2.8%	38.1%
Basic Materials	2.6%	4.0%
Healthcare	2.5%	4.1%
Real Estate	-	-

Return for Risk

RSMV vs. GRW — Risk / Return Rank

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

RSMV

RSMV Risk / Return Rank: 68
RSMV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 66
RSMV Sortino Ratio Rank: 66
RSMV Omega Ratio Rank: 63
RSMV Calmar Ratio Rank: 72
RSMV Martin Ratio Rank: 73

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.

RSMV vs. GRW - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Relative Strength Managed Volatility Strategy ETF (RSMV) 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.

	RSMV	GRW	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.15	—	—
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.00	—	—
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.38	—	—
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.52	—	—
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	13.47	—	—
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

	RSMV	GRW	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.15	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.04	13.58	-12.54

Drawdowns

RSMV vs. GRW - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RSMV drawdown since its inception was -17.58%, which is greater than GRW's maximum drawdown of -0.45%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RSMV and GRW.

Drawdown Indicators

	RSMV	GRW	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-17.58%	-0.45%	-17.13%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-7.27%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.58%	-0.27%	-0.31%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.96%	-0.17%	-3.79%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.90%	—	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	RSMV	GRW	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.39%	—	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	9.67%	—	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	11.94%	8.89%	+3.05%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	14.52%	8.89%	+5.63%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	14.52%	8.89%	+5.63%

RSMV vs. GRW - Expense Ratio Comparison

RSMV has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is higher than GRW's 0.75% expense ratio.

Dividends

RSMV vs. GRW - Dividend Comparison

RSMV's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.92%, while GRW has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025
GRW TCW Durable Growth ETF	0.00%	0.00%
RSMV Relative Strength Managed Volatility Strategy ETF	0.92%	1.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both RSMV and GRW in my portfolio?

RSMV and GRW have a correlation of 0.10, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, RSMV 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, RSMV or GRW?

GRW is cheaper with a 0.75% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for RSMV.

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

RSMV has the higher dividend yield at 0.92%, compared with 0.00% for GRW.

What is the main difference between RSMV and GRW?

They also come from different issuers: Teucrium and TCW. Their fees differ too: 0.95% for RSMV and 0.75% for GRW.