VOTE vs. GRW

Last updated Aug 2, 2026

VOTE (TCW Transform 500 ETF) and GRW (TCW Durable Growth ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - VOTE is a Large Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the Morningstar US Large Cap Index, while GRW is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund actively managed by TCW. VOTE is passively managed, while GRW is actively managed. Their 0.77 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. VOTE charges 0.05%/yr vs 0.75%/yr for GRW.

Performance

VOTE vs. GRW - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in TCW Transform 500 ETF (VOTE) and TCW Durable Growth ETF (GRW). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

VOTE

• 1D: 0.53%
• 1M: -0.05%
• 6M: 8.71%
• YTD: 10.03%
• 1Y: 21.16%
• 3Y*: 19.65%
• 5Y*: 12.43%
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 12.94%

GRW

• 1D: 1.13%
• 1M: -1.32%
• 6M: —
• YTD: —
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: —

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
GRW TCW Durable Growth ETF	$173.33K	$124.39K	$212.92K
VOTE TCW Transform 500 ETF	$1.77M	$1.64M	$2.40M

VOTE vs. GRW - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)
VOTE TCW Transform 500 ETF	-0.20%
GRW TCW Durable Growth ETF	2.98%

Correlation

The correlation between VOTE and GRW is 0.77, which is moderate. They have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently, sharing some price drivers without tracking each other closely.

	Correlation
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 28, 2026	0.77

VOTE vs. GRW - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	VOTE	GRW
Technology	38.5%	26.9%
Financial Services	11.5%	8.8%
Communication Services	9.8%	7.9%
Consumer Cyclical	9.5%	7.5%
Healthcare	9.0%	3.7%
Industrials	8.8%	41.5%
Consumer Defensive	4.4%	-
Energy	3.0%	-
Utilities	2.1%	-
Basic Materials	1.7%	3.9%
Real Estate	1.7%	-

Return for Risk

VOTE vs. GRW — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

VOTE

VOTE Risk / Return Rank: 64
VOTE Sharpe Ratio Rank: 63
VOTE Sortino Ratio Rank: 61
VOTE Omega Ratio Rank: 60
VOTE Calmar Ratio Rank: 60
VOTE Martin Ratio Rank: 73

GRW

Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

VOTE vs. GRW - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for TCW Transform 500 ETF (VOTE) 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.

	VOTE	GRW	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.47	—	—
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.05	—	—
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.26	—	—
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.12	—	—
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	8.96	—	—

Drawdowns

VOTE vs. GRW - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum VOTE drawdown since its inception was -25.71%, which is greater than GRW's maximum drawdown of -4.12%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for VOTE and GRW.

Drawdown Indicators

	VOTE	GRW	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-25.71%	-4.12%	-21.59%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-9.10%	—	—
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-19.08%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-25.71%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.59%	-1.85%	+0.26%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-6.01%	-1.73%	-4.28%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.15%	—	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	VOTE	GRW	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.59%	—	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	10.29%	—	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	13.11%	15.72%	-2.61%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	17.20%	15.72%	+1.48%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	17.08%	15.72%	+1.36%

VOTE vs. GRW - Expense Ratio Comparison

VOTE has a 0.05% expense ratio, which is lower than GRW's 0.75% expense ratio.

Dividends

VOTE vs. GRW - Dividend Comparison

VOTE's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.94%, while GRW has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
GRW TCW Durable Growth ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
VOTE TCW Transform 500 ETF	0.94%	1.03%	1.18%	1.33%	1.54%	0.54%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both VOTE and GRW in my portfolio?

VOTE and GRW have a correlation of 0.77, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, VOTE or GRW?

On fees, VOTE is cheaper at 0.05% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, VOTE or GRW?

VOTE is cheaper with a 0.05% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for GRW.

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

VOTE has the higher dividend yield at 0.94%, compared with 0.00% for GRW.

What is the main difference between VOTE and GRW?

VOTE is categorized as Large Cap Blend Equities, while GRW is Large Cap Growth Equities. Their fees differ too: 0.05% for VOTE and 0.75% for GRW.