SFYF vs. ILCG
SFYF (SoFi Social 50 ETF) and ILCG (iShares Morningstar Growth ETF) are both Large Cap Growth Equities funds - SFYF tracks the SoFi Social 50 Index while ILCG tracks the Morningstar US Large-Mid Cap Broad Growth Index Gross. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, SFYF returned 12.34%/yr vs 14.95%/yr for ILCG. Their correlation of 0.85 suggests significant overlap in exposure. SFYF charges 0.29%/yr vs 0.04%/yr for ILCG.
Performance
SFYF vs. ILCG - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
The year-to-date returns for both stocks are quite close, with SFYF having a 14.85% return and ILCG slightly lower at 14.48%.
SFYF
- 1D
- -0.85%
- 1M
- 8.95%
- YTD
- 14.85%
- 6M
- 14.20%
- 1Y
- 43.96%
- 3Y*
- 36.32%
- 5Y*
- 12.34%
- 10Y*
- —
ILCG
- 1D
- -1.02%
- 1M
- 7.68%
- YTD
- 14.48%
- 6M
- 14.61%
- 1Y
- 29.51%
- 3Y*
- 26.55%
- 5Y*
- 14.95%
- 10Y*
- 18.15%
SFYF vs. ILCG - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
SFYF SoFi Social 50 ETF | 14.85% | 30.00% | 44.62% | 56.80% | -47.73% | 35.83% | 33.65% | 4.95% |
ILCG iShares Morningstar Growth ETF | 14.48% | 16.71% | 32.82% | 40.41% | -31.75% | 24.33% | 38.56% | 13.33% |
Correlation
The correlation between SFYF and ILCG is 0.86, 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 | 0.86 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.87 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.88 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 9, 2019 | 0.85 |
The correlation between SFYF and ILCG has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.85 to 0.88 - a consistent structural relationship.
SFYF vs. ILCG - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
SFYF
ILCG
Technology
Consumer Cyclical
Communication Services
Consumer Defensive
Financial Services
Healthcare
Industrials
Energy
Real Estate
Basic Materials
-
Utilities
-
Technology
SFYF
ILCG
Consumer Cyclical
SFYF
ILCG
Communication Services
SFYF
ILCG
Consumer Defensive
SFYF
ILCG
Financial Services
SFYF
ILCG
Healthcare
SFYF
ILCG
Industrials
SFYF
ILCG
Energy
SFYF
ILCG
Real Estate
SFYF
ILCG
Basic Materials
SFYF
-
ILCG
Utilities
SFYF
-
ILCG
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
SFYF vs. ILCG — Risk / Return Rank
SFYF
ILCG
SFYF vs. ILCG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for SoFi Social 50 ETF (SFYF) and iShares Morningstar Growth ETF (ILCG). 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.
| SFYF | ILCG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.54 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.57 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.40 | 1.32 | +0.08 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.91 | 1.89 | +1.02 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 9.65 | 6.68 | +2.98 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| SFYF | ILCG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.36 | 1.82 | +0.54 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.42 | 0.68 | -0.26 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | — | 0.85 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.61 | 0.59 | +0.03 |
Drawdowns
SFYF vs. ILCG - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum SFYF drawdown since its inception was -56.09%, which is greater than ILCG's maximum drawdown of -52.98%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for SFYF and ILCG.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| SFYF | ILCG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -56.09% | -52.98% | -3.11% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -15.18% | -15.65% | +0.47% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -26.45% | -23.10% | -3.35% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -56.09% | -35.38% | -20.71% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -35.38% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -1.68% | -1.02% | -0.66% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -16.58% | -8.22% | -8.36% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 4.57% | 4.43% | +0.14% |
Volatility
SFYF vs. ILCG - Volatility Comparison
SoFi Social 50 ETF (SFYF) has a higher volatility of 5.58% compared to iShares Morningstar Growth ETF (ILCG) at 4.40%. This indicates that SFYF's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than ILCG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| SFYF | ILCG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 5.58% | 4.40% | +1.18% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 13.21% | 12.81% | +0.40% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 18.74% | 16.31% | +2.43% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 29.28% | 22.00% | +7.28% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 30.68% | 21.53% | +9.15% |
SFYF vs. ILCG - Expense Ratio Comparison
SFYF has a 0.29% expense ratio, which is higher than ILCG's 0.04% expense ratio.
Dividends
SFYF vs. ILCG - Dividend Comparison
SFYF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.29%, less than ILCG's 0.40% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ILCG iShares Morningstar Growth ETF | 0.40% | 0.47% | 0.50% | 0.69% | 0.75% | 0.34% | 0.28% | 0.54% | 0.81% | 0.89% | 0.95% | 0.99% |
SFYF SoFi Social 50 ETF | 0.29% | 0.33% | 0.31% | 1.71% | 1.19% | 0.26% | 0.40% | 0.73% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
SFYF and ILCG have a correlation of 0.86, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
SFYF has higher volatility (5.58%) compared to ILCG (4.40%). In terms of maximum drawdown, SFYF dropped -56.09% vs ILCG's -52.98%.
On 5-year performance, ILCG leads with 14.95% vs 12.34% for SFYF. On fees, ILCG is cheaper at 0.04% per year. On volatility, ILCG has been the lower-risk option at 4.40%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 5-year period, ILCG has performed better with a 14.95% return vs 12.34%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
ILCG is cheaper with a 0.04% expense ratio, compared with 0.29% for SFYF.
ILCG has the higher dividend yield at 0.40%, compared with 0.29% for SFYF.
SFYF tracks SoFi Social 50 Index, while ILCG tracks Morningstar US Large-Mid Cap Broad Growth Index Gross. They also come from different issuers: Toroso Investments and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.29% for SFYF and 0.04% for ILCG.
SFYF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.36 vs 1.82), 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.
Find the right allocation for SFYF and ILCG
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