RWLC vs. BLCR

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

RWLC (Rayliant Wilshire NxtGen US Large Cap Equity ETF) and BLCR (Blackrock Large Cap Core ETF) are both Large Cap Blend Equities funds. RWLC is passively managed, while BLCR is actively managed. Over the past year, RWLC returned 21.97% vs 47.09% for BLCR. A 0.77 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. RWLC charges 0.32%/yr vs 0.36%/yr for BLCR.

Performance

RWLC vs. BLCR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Rayliant Wilshire NxtGen US Large Cap Equity ETF (RWLC) and Blackrock Large Cap Core ETF (BLCR). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, RWLC achieves a 12.91% return, which is significantly lower than BLCR's 19.56% return.

RWLC

• 1D: -0.44%
• 1M: 6.22%
• YTD: 12.91%
• 6M: 15.36%
• 1Y: 21.97%
• 3Y*: 24.01%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

BLCR

• 1D: -0.33%
• 1M: 6.16%
• YTD: 19.56%
• 6M: 21.53%
• 1Y: 47.09%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

RWLC vs. BLCR - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
RWLC Rayliant Wilshire NxtGen US Large Cap Equity ETF	12.91%	20.23%	28.58%	13.38%
BLCR Blackrock Large Cap Core ETF	19.56%	30.93%	17.07%	14.18%

Correlation

The correlation between RWLC and BLCR is 0.70, 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	0.70
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 27, 2023	0.77

The correlation between RWLC and BLCR has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.70 to 0.77 - a consistent structural relationship.

RWLC vs. BLCR - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	RWLC	BLCR
Technology	27.9%	35.7%
Financial Services	15.7%	12.1%
Healthcare	11.8%	7.6%
Consumer Cyclical	11.2%	10.9%
Communication Services	9.7%	11.0%
Consumer Defensive	6.8%	-
Energy	6.6%	2.2%
Industrials	5.6%	13.5%
Basic Materials	2.2%	2.2%
Utilities	1.9%	1.6%
Real Estate	0.7%	-

Return for Risk

RWLC vs. BLCR — Risk / Return Rank

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

RWLC

RWLC Risk / Return Rank: 49
RWLC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 46
RWLC Sortino Ratio Rank: 49
RWLC Omega Ratio Rank: 47
RWLC Calmar Ratio Rank: 49
RWLC Martin Ratio Rank: 52

BLCR

BLCR Risk / Return Rank: 87
BLCR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 89
BLCR Sortino Ratio Rank: 87
BLCR Omega Ratio Rank: 85
BLCR Calmar Ratio Rank: 84
BLCR Martin Ratio Rank: 91

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.

RWLC vs. BLCR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Rayliant Wilshire NxtGen US Large Cap Equity ETF (RWLC) and Blackrock Large Cap Core ETF (BLCR). 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.

	RWLC	BLCR	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.59	3.05	-1.46
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.39	4.02	-1.63
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.29	1.52	-0.23
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.36	4.61	-2.25
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	8.78	21.86	-13.08
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

RWLC vs. BLCR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RWLC Sharpe Ratio is 1.59, which is lower than the BLCR Sharpe Ratio of 3.05. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RWLC and BLCR, 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

	RWLC	BLCR	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.59	3.05	-1.46
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.85	1.90	-1.05

Drawdowns

RWLC vs. BLCR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RWLC drawdown since its inception was -21.00%, roughly equal to the maximum BLCR drawdown of -21.29%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RWLC and BLCR.

Drawdown Indicators

	RWLC	BLCR	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-21.00%	-21.29%	+0.29%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-9.33%	-10.26%	+0.93%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-16.20%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.44%	-0.37%	-0.07%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-5.43%	-2.19%	-3.24%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.51%	2.16%	+0.35%

Volatility

RWLC vs. BLCR - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Rayliant Wilshire NxtGen US Large Cap Equity ETF (RWLC) is 2.66%, while Blackrock Large Cap Core ETF (BLCR) has a volatility of 4.45%. This indicates that RWLC experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than BLCR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	RWLC	BLCR	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.66%	4.45%	-1.79%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	10.97%	12.24%	-1.27%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	13.88%	15.54%	-1.66%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	16.48%	17.47%	-0.99%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	16.48%	17.47%	-0.99%

RWLC vs. BLCR - Expense Ratio Comparison

RWLC has a 0.32% expense ratio, which is lower than BLCR's 0.36% expense ratio.

Dividends

RWLC vs. BLCR - Dividend Comparison

RWLC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 13.01%, more than BLCR's 0.23% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
BLCR Blackrock Large Cap Core ETF	0.23%	0.33%	0.75%	0.13%	0.00%	0.00%
RWLC Rayliant Wilshire NxtGen US Large Cap Equity ETF	13.01%	14.69%	0.98%	1.63%	1.39%	0.01%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both RWLC and BLCR in my portfolio?

RWLC and BLCR have a correlation of 0.70, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, RWLC or BLCR?

BLCR has higher volatility (4.45%) compared to RWLC (2.66%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RWLC dropped -21.00% vs BLCR's -21.29%.

Which ETF is better, RWLC or BLCR?

On 1-year performance, BLCR leads with 47.09% vs 21.97% for RWLC. On fees, RWLC is cheaper at 0.32% per year. On volatility, RWLC has been the lower-risk option at 2.66%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, RWLC or BLCR?

Over the 1-year period, BLCR has performed better with a 47.09% return vs 21.97%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, RWLC or BLCR?

RWLC is cheaper with a 0.32% expense ratio, compared with 0.36% for BLCR.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, RWLC or BLCR?

RWLC has the higher dividend yield at 13.01%, compared with 0.23% for BLCR.

What is the main difference between RWLC and BLCR?

They also come from different issuers: Rayliant and BlackRock. Their fees differ too: 0.32% for RWLC and 0.36% for BLCR.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

BLCR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.05 vs 1.59), 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.