LRGC ranks 3rd and ATFV 50th of 90 funds in the US Active Growth Category.
ATFV vs LRGC
LRGC −0.17pt a year
0.56%0.39%
ATFV 1.7×the volume
56.6K34.1K
ATFV +13.8pt
+34.2%+20.4%
ATFV vs LRGC Performance
−2.9%+9.2%
- ATFV 0.56%
- LRGC 0.39%, better
- ATFV $941M
- LRGC $1.35B
- ATFV −2.9%
- LRGC +9.2%, better
- ATFV 0.20%
- LRGC 0.53%, better
- ATFV 36
- LRGC 72
- ATFV 56.6K sh, better
- LRGC 34.1K sh
- ATFV $35.25
- LRGC $85.00
ETF.net Grade
| Pillar | ATFV | LRGC |
|---|---|---|
| Cost | C47 | A82Higher |
| Mission | B61 | A79Higher |
| Risk | D35 | A90Higher |
| Tradability | C47 | A75Higher |
| Holdings | C48 | A77Higher |
| Durability | A83Higher | A78 |
Rank among US Active Growth funds
Same Category. ATFV and LRGC are both graded against the same 90 US Active Growth funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
Our read on each fund
ATFVC
LRGCA
In short
ATFV Alger's best-ideas book: roughly 35 high-conviction growth names, and one of the few ETFs that keeps its holdings confidential, pricing off a verified value published every second instead. The 35 is a memorial to colleagues lost on 9/11.
LRGC AB's stock pickers in an ETF wrapper: roughly 70 large-cap US names picked with fundamental research plus quant screens, measured against the S&P 500. Active conviction, priced under the typical active peer.
Stated mandate
ATFV The fund seeks long-term capital appreciation through an actively managed portfolio of approximately 35 stocks selected as the manager’s best ideas in highly disrupted market segments.
LRGC The Fund seeks long-term growth of capital. It is actively managed and normally invests at least 80% of net assets in equities of large-capitalization U.S. companies.
Why people hold it
Worth knowing
ATFV vs LRGC Holdings
How we measure overlap
Each holding counts at its smaller weight in the two funds, summed over the full Holdings. Sector, country and asset class use the same rule on each fund’s split. Cash, FX and derivative lines stay out of the counts. Two bond funds get no overlap figure.
ATFV vs LRGC Cost
Overpaying ATFV vs LRGC
$3,190
On $10,000 over 30 years. 7% growth a year before fees, expense ratio only.
ATFV 0.56%
$11,088
LRGC 0.39%
$7,898
Cost over time
Year by year
| Year | ATFV | LRGC | Overpaying |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10 | $1,006 | $705 | $301 |
| 20 | $3,855 | $2,725 | $1,130 |
| 30 | $11,088 | $7,898 | $3,190 |
- 0.56%ATFV
- 0.39%LRGC, cheaper
- Middle half of US Active Growth funds
- Median 0.55%
LRGC 14th cheapest of 90 funds
ATFV 47th cheapest of 90 funds
ATFV vs LRGC Dividends
- ATFV 0.20%
- LRGC 0.53%, better
- ATFV $0.07
- LRGC $0.45
- ATFV $0.07
- LRGC $0.45
- ATFV Dec 18, 2025
- LRGC Dec 17, 2025
- ATFV Dec 31, 2025
- LRGC Dec 18, 2025
- ATFV Annual
- LRGC Annual
Distribution history
ATFV vs LRGC Risk
Fall from peak · 5 years
Risk facts
- Volatility
- ATFV 24.7%LRGC 12.7%, better
- Return per unit of risk
- ATFV 1.22LRGC 1.26, better
- Worst fall
- ATFV −45.3%LRGC −19.4%
- Market sensitivity
- ATFV 1.59LRGC 1.00
ATFV and LRGC in the news
Popular comparisons
- 0.56% · 0.18%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
- 0.39% · 0.18%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
- 0.56% · 0.30%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
- 0.39% · 0.30%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
- 0.56% · 0.18%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
- 0.39% · 0.18%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
