SLNZ vs. GRW
SLNZ (TCW Senior Loan ETF) and GRW (TCW Durable Growth ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - SLNZ is a Bank Loan fund actively managed by TCW, while GRW is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund actively managed by TCW. Both are actively managed. A 0.60 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. SLNZ charges 0.65%/yr vs 0.75%/yr for GRW.
Performance
SLNZ vs. GRW - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
SLNZ
- 1D
- -0.10%
- 1M
- 0.47%
- YTD
- 1.80%
- 6M
- 1.92%
- 1Y
- 4.89%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
GRW
- 1D
- -0.89%
- 1M
- —
- YTD
- —
- 6M
- —
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
SLNZ vs. GRW - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | |
|---|---|
SLNZ TCW Senior Loan ETF | 0.65% |
GRW TCW Durable Growth ETF | 1.71% |
Correlation
The correlation between SLNZ and GRW is 0.60, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 28, 2026 | 0.60 |
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
SLNZ vs. GRW — Risk / Return Rank
SLNZ
GRW
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
SLNZ vs. GRW - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for TCW Senior Loan ETF (SLNZ) 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.
Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.
| SLNZ | GRW | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.22 | — | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.91 | — | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 5.97 | — | — |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
SLNZ vs. GRW - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum SLNZ drawdown since its inception was -2.57%, smaller than the maximum GRW drawdown of -3.83%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for SLNZ and GRW.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| SLNZ | GRW | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -2.57% | -3.83% | +1.26% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -2.57% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.10% | -2.25% | +2.15% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -0.44% | -0.99% | +0.55% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 0.82% | — | — |
Volatility
SLNZ vs. GRW - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| SLNZ | GRW | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 0.85% | — | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 3.89% | — | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 4.46% | 19.15% | -14.69% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 4.25% | 19.15% | -14.90% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 4.25% | 19.15% | -14.90% |
SLNZ vs. GRW - Expense Ratio Comparison
SLNZ has a 0.65% expense ratio, which is lower than GRW's 0.75% expense ratio.
Dividends
SLNZ vs. GRW - Dividend Comparison
SLNZ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 7.53%, while GRW has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 |
|---|---|---|---|
GRW TCW Durable Growth ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
SLNZ TCW Senior Loan ETF | 7.53% | 7.39% | 1.39% |
Frequently Asked Questions
SLNZ and GRW have a correlation of 0.60, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, SLNZ is cheaper at 0.65% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
SLNZ is cheaper with a 0.65% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for GRW.
SLNZ has the higher dividend yield at 7.53%, compared with 0.00% for GRW.
SLNZ is categorized as Bank Loan, while GRW is Large Cap Growth Equities. Their fees differ too: 0.65% for SLNZ and 0.75% for GRW.
Find the right allocation for SLNZ and GRW
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