LRGC ranks 3rd and IWFG 30th of 90 funds in the US Active Growth Category.
IWFG vs LRGC
LRGC −0.07pt a year
0.46%0.39%
LRGC 3.4×the volume
10K34.1K
LRGC +0.3pt
+21.2%+21.5%
IWFG vs LRGC Performance
−6.2%+9.5%
- IWFG 0.46%
- LRGC 0.39%, better
- IWFG $64M
- LRGC $1.37B
- IWFG −6.2%
- LRGC +9.5%, better
- IWFG 0.00%
- LRGC 0.53%, better
- IWFG 28
- LRGC 72
- IWFG 10K sh
- LRGC 34.1K sh, better
- IWFG $51.91
- LRGC $85.00
ETF.net Grade
| Pillar | IWFG | LRGC |
|---|---|---|
| Cost | A71 | A82Higher |
| Mission | A75 | A79Higher |
| Risk | D39 | A90Higher |
| Tradability | B65 | A75Higher |
| Holdings | D38 | A77Higher |
| Durability | C47 | A78Higher |
Rank among US Active Growth funds
Same Category. IWFG 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
IWFGB
LRGCA
In short
IWFG Winslow Capital is a growth-only shop, and IWFG is its concentrated cut: roughly two dozen US large-cap growth names, non-diversified by design, at 0.46% net of a waiver through August 28, 2027.
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
IWFG The Fund’s stated objective is long-term capital appreciation.
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
IWFG 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.
IWFG vs LRGC Cost
Overpaying IWFG vs LRGC
$1,332
On $10,000 over 30 years. 7% growth a year before fees, expense ratio only.
IWFG 0.46%
$9,230
LRGC 0.39%
$7,898
Cost over time
Year by year
| Year | IWFG | LRGC | Overpaying |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10 | $830 | $705 | $125 |
| 20 | $3,195 | $2,725 | $470 |
| 30 | $9,230 | $7,898 | $1,332 |
- 0.46%IWFG
- 0.39%LRGC, cheaper
- Middle half of US Active Growth funds
- Median 0.55%
LRGC 14th cheapest of 90 funds
IWFG 28th cheapest of 90 funds
IWFG vs LRGC Dividends
- IWFG 0.00%
- LRGC 0.53%, better
- IWFG None
- LRGC $0.45
- IWFG
- LRGC $0.45
- IWFG
- LRGC Dec 17, 2025
- IWFG
- LRGC Dec 18, 2025
- IWFG
- LRGC Annual
Distribution history
IWFG vs LRGC Risk
Fall from peak · 5 years
Risk facts
- Volatility
- IWFG 17.6%LRGC 12.7%, better
- Return per unit of risk
- IWFG 0.94LRGC 1.26, better
- Worst fall
- IWFG −22.0%LRGC −19.4%
- Market sensitivity
- IWFG 1.14LRGC 1.00
IWFG and LRGC in the news
Popular comparisons
- 0.46% · 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.
- 0.46% · 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.
- 0.46% · 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.
