Skip to content

GRW vs QIDX

TCW Durable Growth ETF

GRWDNasdaq

Indexperts Quality Earnings Focused ETF

QIDXBNYSE Arca

Overlap

Expense ratio

QIDX −0.25pt a year

GRW0.75%QIDX0.50%

Avg volume · 30D

GRW 1.3×the volume

GRW5.16KQIDX3.94K

GRW vs QIDX Performance

Oct 31, 2025 – Nov 2, 2026

−2.5%GRW+8.7%QIDX

Oct 31, 2025 to Nov 2, 2026. GRW −2.5%. QIDX +8.7%. Use the arrow keys to read each point.−15%−10%5%Oct 2025May 2026Nov 2026
Expense ratio
GRW 0.75%
QIDX 0.50%, better
Fund size
GRW $58M
QIDX $39M
1Y total return
GRW −2.5%
QIDX +8.7%, better
Yield (12M)
GRW 0.00%
QIDX 0.91%, better
Holdings
GRW 31
QIDX 130
Avg volume (30D)
GRW 5.16K sh, better
QIDX 3.94K sh
NAV per share
GRW $31.05
QIDX $11.55
52W range

ETF.net Grade

GRW: Cost 25, Risk 13, Mission 66, Tradability 27, Holdings 56, Durability 73. QIDX: Cost 75, Risk 76, Mission not scored, Tradability 23, Holdings 93, Durability 45.
Pillar letters and Scores for GRW, QIDX, with each pillar’s weight
PillarGRWQIDX
Cost30% weightD25A75Higher
Mission25% weightB66Not scored
Risk15% weightF13A76Higher
Tradability15% weightD27HigherF23
Holdings10% weightB56A93Higher
Durability5% weightA73HigherC45

Rank among US Active Quality funds

Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.

Same Category. GRW and QIDX are both graded against the same 16 US Active Quality funds, so their Grades compare head to head.

US Active Quality⁠

Category · 16 funds
See all 16 ›

QIDX ranks 4th and GRW 14th of 16 funds in the US Active Quality Category.

  1. Rank 1ANPFENpf Core Equity EtfScore 79
  2. Rank 2AQLTYGMO US Quality ETFScore 75
  3. Rank 3BAQECAQE Core ETFScore 66
  4. Rank 4BQIDXIndexperts Quality Earnings Focused ETFScore 64
  5. Rank 5BQFFQualivian Focus Fund ETFScore 58
  6. Rank 13DNQLTNeuberger Quality Select ETFScore 31
  7. Rank 14DGRWTCW Durable Growth ETFScore 30
  8. Rank 15DMPLYStrategy Shares Monopoly ETFScore 26
  9. OTAXNot yet graded

Our read on each fund

ETF.net Research

GRWDTCW Durable Growth ETF

QIDXBIndexperts Quality Earnings Focused ETF

In short

GRW The name is the strategy: roughly 30 businesses TCW believes can keep compounding, picked actively and measured against the S&P 500. A stock-picker's book priced like one, not an index sleeve.

QIDX An active quality fund stitched from Indexperts' own house indexes: steady-earnings names across large, mid and small caps, with a manager free to override the rules. It charges less than the typical fund in its peer group.

Stated mandate

GRW The fund seeks long-term growth of capital through active management.

QIDX The Fund seeks total return.

Why people hold it

  • GRW Roughly 30 names, actively chosen. Concentration is the point here: each holding is big enough to matter, which is the opposite of a closet index fund.
  • Leans toward wide-moat, cash-generating businesses rather than whatever is running hottest, and sets itself against the S&P 500 so the comparison is an honest one.tcw.com
  • The portfolio itself is the strongest part of the package; the fee and the thin trading are where the trade-offs sit.
  • QIDX Charges 0.50% a year, below the median for its quality-focused peer group and about half what the priciest name in that group (EQTY, 0.99%) asks.
  • Rules first, judgment second: the portfolio is drawn from Indexperts' own growth and consistent-value indexes, with the advisor free to trim or exclude.sec.gov
  • Reaches across large, mid and small caps instead of hugging a handful of mega caps, and the portfolio build ranks among the stronger ones in its peer group.sec.gov
  • A plain 1940 Act equity fund seeking total return, with cash paid out quarterly. No leverage, no options overlay, no derivatives wrapper to decode.

Worth knowing

  • GRW At 0.75% a year it sits in the pricier half of its active large-cap peer group. JUSA charges 0.12% and FELG 0.18% for actively steered large-cap exposure.
  • Thinly traded. Spreads can widen and bigger orders can push the price, so how you enter matters more than it would in a mega-cap index fund.
  • Concentration cuts both ways: with roughly 30 holdings, one stumble shows up fast. Distributions land once or twice a year, so this is not an income line item.
  • QIDX Listed at the end of 2024, so the track record is short and any read on its risk profile rests on limited history.
  • Small and thinly traded: spreads can run wider than on giant index funds, and size of order matters more.
  • You are paying 0.50% for a manager's judgment when index-built quality rivals like PSET run 0.15%.

Full GRW profile⁠

Full QIDX profile⁠

GRW vs QIDX 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.

GRW vs QIDX Cost

Overpaying GRW vs QIDX

$4,503

On $10,000 over 30 years. 7% growth a year before fees, expense ratio only.

  • GRW 0.75%

    $14,482

  • QIDX 0.50%

    $9,979

$10,000
30 years

Cost over time

  • GRW 0.75%
  • QIDX 0.50%
  • Overpaying
One line per fund, from year 0 to year 30. Use the arrow keys to read each point.$0$5K$10K$15K051015202530GRW $14,482QIDX $9,979

Year by year

YearGRWQIDXOverpaying
10$1,336$900$436
20$5,078$3,460$1,618
30$14,482$9,979$4,503

Expense ratio

  • 0.75%GRW
  • 0.50%QIDX, cheaper
  • Middle half of US Active Quality funds
  • Median 0.65%

QIDX 4th cheapest of 16 funds

GRW 12th cheapest of 16 funds

GRW vs QIDX Dividends

Last 12 months to Nov 2, 2026
Yield (12M)
GRW 0.00%
QIDX 0.91%, better
Payout (12M)
GRW None
QIDX $0.11
Last payment
GRW No data
QIDX $0.03
Ex-dividend
GRW No data
QIDX Sep 29, 2026
Paid on
GRW No data
QIDX Sep 30, 2026
Frequency
GRW No data
QIDX Quarterly

Distribution history

Per share, 2024 to 2026, same scale for both

GRW3 paymentsAll GRW payments⁠
One bar per payment. 3 payments from 2024 to 2026 YTD. Jun 24, 2024 $0.01; Dec 23, 2024 $3.72; Sep 22, 2025 $0.08. Use the arrow keys to read each point.$0$2.502026YTD
QIDXQuarterly · 7 paymentsAll QIDX payments⁠
One bar per payment. 7 payments from 2024 to 2026 YTD. Mar 28, 2025 $0.02; Jun 27, 2025 $0.02; Sep 29, 2025 $0.02; Dec 30, 2025 $0.03; Mar 30, 2026 $0.03; Jun 29, 2026 $0.03; Sep 29, 2026 $0.03. Use the arrow keys to read each point.$0$2.502026YTD

GRW vs QIDX Risk

Fall from peak · 5 years

This chart needs five years of history for both funds.

Risk facts

VolatilityStd dev, 3 years
GRW 13.3%since Jun 2024QIDX 9.9%since Feb 2025
Return per unit of riskSharpe ratio, 3 years
GRW −0.13since Jun 2024QIDX 0.25since Feb 2025
Worst fallMax drawdown, 5 years
GRW −23.8%since May 2024QIDX −15.0%since Jan 2025
Market sensitivityBeta, 5 years
GRW 0.98QIDX 0.57

Popular comparisons

  • GRWDvsNPFEA

    TCW Durable Growth ETF · Npf Core Equity Etf

    Expense ratio
    0.75% · 0.40%
    Category
    Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
  • QIDXBvsNPFEA

    Indexperts Quality Earnings Focused ETF · Npf Core Equity Etf

    Expense ratio
    0.50% · 0.40%
    Category
    Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
  • GRWDvsQLTYA

    TCW Durable Growth ETF · GMO US Quality ETF

    Expense ratio
    0.75% · 0.50%
    Category
    Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
  • QIDXBvsQLTYA

    Indexperts Quality Earnings Focused ETF · GMO US Quality ETF

    Expense ratio
    0.50% · 0.50%
    Category
    Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
  • GRWDvsAQECB

    TCW Durable Growth ETF · AQE Core ETF

    Expense ratio
    0.75% · 0.49%
    Category
    Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
  • QIDXBvsAQECB

    Indexperts Quality Earnings Focused ETF · AQE Core ETF

    Expense ratio
    0.50% · 0.49%
    Category
    Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.