LRGC ranks 3rd and IWLG 27th of 90 funds in the US Active Growth Category.
IWLG vs LRGC
LRGC −0.11pt a year
0.50%0.39%
LRGC 1.7×the volume
20.5K34.1K
LRGC +0.6pt
+19.8%+20.4%
IWLG vs LRGC Performance
−4.3%+9.2%
- IWLG 0.50%
- LRGC 0.39%, better
- IWLG $318M
- LRGC $1.35B
- IWLG −4.3%
- LRGC +9.2%, better
- IWLG 0.00%
- LRGC 0.53%, better
- IWLG 42
- LRGC 72
- IWLG 20.5K sh
- LRGC 34.1K sh, better
- IWLG $54.20
- LRGC $85.00
ETF.net Grade
| Pillar | IWLG | LRGC |
|---|---|---|
| Cost | B62 | A82Higher |
| Mission | A78 | A79Higher |
| Risk | D39 | A90Higher |
| Tradability | A75 | A75 |
| Holdings | B58 | A77Higher |
| Durability | A71 | A78Higher |
Rank among US Active Growth funds
Same Category. IWLG 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
IWLGB
LRGCA
In short
IWLG A growth-only boutique's flagship large-cap strategy, delivered in an ETF wrapper: roughly 40 high-conviction US names, non-diversified by design, measured against the Russell 1000 Growth Index.
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
IWLG The Fund seeks long-term growth of capital. It normally invests at least 80% of net assets in large-capitalization companies, defined as companies with market capitalizations above $4 billion, and typically invests substantially in domestic securities.
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
IWLG 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.
IWLG vs LRGC Cost
Overpaying IWLG vs LRGC
$2,081
On $10,000 over 30 years. 7% growth a year before fees, expense ratio only.
IWLG 0.50%
$9,979
LRGC 0.39%
$7,898
Cost over time
Year by year
| Year | IWLG | LRGC | Overpaying |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10 | $900 | $705 | $195 |
| 20 | $3,460 | $2,725 | $735 |
| 30 | $9,979 | $7,898 | $2,081 |
- 0.50%IWLG
- 0.39%LRGC, cheaper
- Middle half of US Active Growth funds
- Median 0.55%
LRGC 14th cheapest of 90 funds
IWLG 33rd cheapest of 90 funds
IWLG vs LRGC Dividends
- IWLG 0.00%
- LRGC 0.53%, better
- IWLG $0.0013
- LRGC $0.45
- IWLG $0.0013
- LRGC $0.45
- IWLG Dec 19, 2025
- LRGC Dec 17, 2025
- IWLG Dec 26, 2025
- LRGC Dec 18, 2025
- IWLG Annual
- LRGC Annual
Distribution history
IWLG vs LRGC Risk
Fall from peak · 5 years
Risk facts
- Volatility
- IWLG 18.1%LRGC 12.7%, better
- Return per unit of risk
- IWLG 0.93LRGC 1.26, better
- Worst fall
- IWLG −23.2%LRGC −19.4%
- Market sensitivity
- IWLG 1.23LRGC 1.00
Popular comparisons
- 0.50% · 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.
- 0.50% · 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.
- 0.50% · 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.
