XCOR vs. IUSG

Last updated Jul 18, 2026

XCOR (Fundx ETF) and IUSG (iShares Core S&P U.S. Growth ETF) are both Large Cap Growth Equities funds. XCOR is actively managed, while IUSG is passively managed. Over the past 3 years, XCOR returned 18.02%/yr vs 23.31%/yr for IUSG. Their correlation of 0.94 suggests significant overlap in exposure. XCOR charges 1.27%/yr vs 0.04%/yr for IUSG.

Performance

XCOR vs. IUSG - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Fundx ETF (XCOR) and iShares Core S&P U.S. Growth ETF (IUSG). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, XCOR achieves a 6.95% return, which is significantly lower than IUSG's 9.67% return.

XCOR

• 1D: -0.88%
• 1M: -3.73%
• 6M: 6.11%
• YTD: 6.95%
• 1Y: 16.99%
• 3Y*: 18.02%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

IUSG

• 1D: -1.34%
• 1M: -0.95%
• 6M: 8.77%
• YTD: 9.67%
• 1Y: 20.39%
• 3Y*: 23.31%
• 5Y*: 13.24%
• 10Y*: 17.09%

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

XCOR vs. IUSG - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
XCOR Fundx ETF	6.95%	12.50%	29.57%	14.34%	8.71%
IUSG iShares Core S&P U.S. Growth ETF	9.67%	21.23%	34.70%	29.28%	3.65%

Correlation

The correlation between XCOR and IUSG is 0.95, 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	0.95
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.96
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 17, 2022	0.94

The correlation between XCOR and IUSG has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.94 to 0.96 - a consistent structural relationship.

XCOR vs. IUSG - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	XCOR	IUSG
Technology	40.4%	49.9%
Financial Services	12.3%	9.0%
Communication Services	11.2%	15.1%
Consumer Cyclical	9.4%	8.4%
Industrials	7.3%	6.7%
Healthcare	6.0%	6.8%
Consumer Defensive	4.2%	1.2%
Energy	3.6%	0.3%
Utilities	2.3%	1.2%
Basic Materials	2.3%	0.5%
Real Estate	1.1%	0.9%

Return for Risk

XCOR vs. IUSG — Risk / Return Rank

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

XCOR

XCOR Risk / Return Rank: 43
XCOR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 41
XCOR Sortino Ratio Rank: 39
XCOR Omega Ratio Rank: 39
XCOR Calmar Ratio Rank: 45
XCOR Martin Ratio Rank: 52

IUSG

IUSG Risk / Return Rank: 40
IUSG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 40
IUSG Sortino Ratio Rank: 39
IUSG Omega Ratio Rank: 38
IUSG Calmar Ratio Rank: 37
IUSG Martin Ratio Rank: 47

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.

XCOR vs. IUSG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Fundx ETF (XCOR) and iShares Core S&P U.S. Growth ETF (IUSG). 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.

	XCOR	IUSG	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.15	1.19	-0.04
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.63	1.69	-0.06
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.21	1.21	0.00
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.78	1.57	+0.21
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	6.79	6.12	+0.67

XCOR vs. IUSG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XCOR Sharpe Ratio is 1.15, which is comparable to the IUSG Sharpe Ratio of 1.19. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XCOR and IUSG, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

XCOR vs. IUSG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XCOR drawdown since its inception was -22.54%, smaller than the maximum IUSG drawdown of -63.41%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XCOR and IUSG.

Drawdown Indicators

	XCOR	IUSG	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-22.54%	-63.41%	+40.87%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-9.60%	-13.07%	+3.47%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-22.54%	-22.28%	-0.26%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-32.21%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-32.35%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-6.38%	-4.81%	-1.57%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.12%	-21.36%	+18.24%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.51%	3.34%	-0.83%

Volatility

XCOR vs. IUSG - Volatility Comparison

Fundx ETF (XCOR) has a higher volatility of 6.34% compared to iShares Core S&P U.S. Growth ETF (IUSG) at 5.63%. This indicates that XCOR's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than IUSG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	XCOR	IUSG	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.34%	5.63%	+0.71%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	12.68%	14.15%	-1.47%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	14.81%	17.27%	-2.46%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	17.29%	21.13%	-3.84%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	17.29%	20.49%	-3.20%

XCOR vs. IUSG - Expense Ratio Comparison

XCOR has a 1.27% expense ratio, which is higher than IUSG's 0.04% expense ratio.

Dividends

XCOR vs. IUSG - Dividend Comparison

XCOR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.40%, less than IUSG's 0.50% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
IUSG iShares Core S&P U.S. Growth ETF	0.50%	0.53%	0.59%	1.12%	1.07%	0.59%	0.93%	1.64%	1.32%	1.28%	1.48%	1.29%
XCOR Fundx ETF	0.40%	0.43%	0.00%	0.95%	2.52%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both XCOR and IUSG in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.95, XCOR and IUSG move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

Which is riskier, XCOR or IUSG?

XCOR has higher volatility (6.34%) compared to IUSG (5.63%). In terms of maximum drawdown, XCOR dropped -22.54% vs IUSG's -63.41%.

Which ETF is better, XCOR or IUSG?

On 3-year performance, IUSG leads with 23.31% vs 18.02% for XCOR. On fees, IUSG is cheaper at 0.04% per year. On volatility, IUSG has been the lower-risk option at 5.63%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, XCOR or IUSG?

Over the 3-year period, IUSG has performed better with a 23.31% return vs 18.02%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, XCOR or IUSG?

IUSG is cheaper with a 0.04% expense ratio, compared with 1.27% for XCOR.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, XCOR or IUSG?

IUSG has the higher dividend yield at 0.50%, compared with 0.40% for XCOR.

What is the main difference between XCOR and IUSG?

They also come from different issuers: FundX and iShares. Their fees differ too: 1.27% for XCOR and 0.04% for IUSG.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

IUSG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.19 vs 1.15), 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.