XNAV vs. ILCG

Last updated Jul 18, 2026

XNAV (FundX Aggressive ETF) and ILCG (iShares Morningstar Growth ETF) are both Large Cap Growth Equities funds. XNAV is actively managed, while ILCG is passively managed. Over the past 3 years, XNAV returned 17.45%/yr vs 21.04%/yr for ILCG. Their correlation of 0.89 suggests significant overlap in exposure. XNAV charges 1.30%/yr vs 0.04%/yr for ILCG.

Performance

XNAV vs. ILCG - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in FundX Aggressive ETF (XNAV) and iShares Morningstar Growth ETF (ILCG). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, XNAV achieves a 10.46% return, which is significantly higher than ILCG's 8.39% return.

XNAV

• 1D: -0.73%
• 1M: -7.49%
• 6M: 5.50%
• YTD: 10.46%
• 1Y: 23.96%
• 3Y*: 17.45%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

ILCG

• 1D: -1.28%
• 1M: -2.03%
• 6M: 7.44%
• YTD: 8.39%
• 1Y: 14.48%
• 3Y*: 21.04%
• 5Y*: 12.12%
• 10Y*: 17.28%

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

XNAV vs. ILCG - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
XNAV FundX Aggressive ETF	10.46%	13.61%	25.44%	16.11%	8.67%
ILCG iShares Morningstar Growth ETF	8.39%	16.71%	32.82%	40.41%	3.69%

Correlation

The correlation between XNAV and ILCG is 0.87, 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	0.87
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.92
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 17, 2022	0.89

The correlation between XNAV and ILCG has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.87 to 0.92 - a consistent structural relationship.

XNAV vs. ILCG - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	XNAV	ILCG
Technology	41.5%	53.1%
Industrials	10.6%	7.7%
Energy	10.5%	0.4%
Financial Services	7.8%	5.5%
Consumer Cyclical	6.7%	10.1%
Basic Materials	6.2%	1.0%
Communication Services	5.7%	13.5%
Healthcare	3.8%	5.2%
Consumer Defensive	3.3%	1.4%
Utilities	3.3%	0.7%
Real Estate	0.7%	1.3%

Return for Risk

XNAV vs. ILCG — Risk / Return Rank

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

XNAV

XNAV Risk / Return Rank: 46
XNAV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 44
XNAV Sortino Ratio Rank: 40
XNAV Omega Ratio Rank: 42
XNAV Calmar Ratio Rank: 54
XNAV Martin Ratio Rank: 53

ILCG

ILCG Risk / Return Rank: 26
ILCG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 27
ILCG Sortino Ratio Rank: 25
ILCG Omega Ratio Rank: 25
ILCG Calmar Ratio Rank: 24
ILCG Martin Ratio Rank: 28

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.

XNAV vs. ILCG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for FundX Aggressive ETF (XNAV) 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.

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.

	XNAV	ILCG	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.22	0.80	+0.42
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.66	1.18	+0.48
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.22	1.15	+0.07
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.10	0.93	+1.17
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	6.90	3.09	+3.81

XNAV vs. ILCG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XNAV Sharpe Ratio is 1.22, which is higher than the ILCG Sharpe Ratio of 0.80. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XNAV and ILCG, 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

XNAV vs. ILCG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XNAV drawdown since its inception was -24.27%, smaller than the maximum ILCG drawdown of -52.98%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XNAV and ILCG.

Drawdown Indicators

	XNAV	ILCG	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-24.27%	-52.98%	+28.71%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-11.47%	-15.65%	+4.18%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-24.27%	-23.10%	-1.17%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-35.38%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-35.38%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-11.28%	-6.29%	-4.99%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.65%	-8.20%	+4.55%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.48%	4.70%	-1.22%

Volatility

XNAV vs. ILCG - Volatility Comparison

FundX Aggressive ETF (XNAV) has a higher volatility of 8.66% compared to iShares Morningstar Growth ETF (ILCG) at 6.60%. This indicates that XNAV'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.

Volatility by Period

	XNAV	ILCG	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	8.66%	6.60%	+2.06%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	17.39%	15.23%	+2.16%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	19.79%	18.24%	+1.55%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	19.34%	22.32%	-2.98%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	19.34%	21.65%	-2.31%

XNAV vs. ILCG - Expense Ratio Comparison

XNAV has a 1.30% expense ratio, which is higher than ILCG's 0.04% expense ratio.

Dividends

XNAV vs. ILCG - Dividend Comparison

XNAV's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.53%, more than ILCG's 0.42% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
ILCG iShares Morningstar Growth ETF	0.42%	0.47%	0.50%	0.69%	0.75%	0.34%	0.28%	0.54%	0.81%	0.89%	0.95%	0.99%
XNAV FundX Aggressive ETF	0.53%	0.58%	0.09%	1.21%	1.47%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both XNAV and ILCG in my portfolio?

XNAV and ILCG have a correlation of 0.87, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, XNAV or ILCG?

XNAV has higher volatility (8.66%) compared to ILCG (6.60%). In terms of maximum drawdown, XNAV dropped -24.27% vs ILCG's -52.98%.

Which ETF is better, XNAV or ILCG?

On 3-year performance, ILCG leads with 21.04% vs 17.45% for XNAV. On fees, ILCG is cheaper at 0.04% per year. On volatility, ILCG has been the lower-risk option at 6.60%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, XNAV or ILCG?

Over the 3-year period, ILCG has performed better with a 21.04% return vs 17.45%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, XNAV or ILCG?

ILCG is cheaper with a 0.04% expense ratio, compared with 1.30% for XNAV.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, XNAV or ILCG?

XNAV has the higher dividend yield at 0.53%, compared with 0.42% for ILCG.

What is the main difference between XNAV and ILCG?

They also come from different issuers: FundX and iShares. Their fees differ too: 1.30% for XNAV and 0.04% for ILCG.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

XNAV currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.22 vs 0.80), 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.