USCA ranks 2nd and NULC 8th of 30 funds in the US Factor Index Category.
NULC vs USCA
USCA −0.14pt a year
0.21%0.07%
USCA 24.3×the volume
4.03K97.9K
NULC +0.1pt
+20.6%+20.5%
NULC vs USCA Performance
+13.9%+7.7%
- NULC 0.21%
- USCA 0.07%, better
- NULC $80M
- USCA $3.42B
- NULC +13.9%, better
- USCA +7.7%
- NULC 8.90%, better
- USCA 1.05%
- NULC 129
- USCA 392
- NULC 4.03K sh
- USCA 97.9K sh, better
- NULC $54.93
- USCA $44.82
ETF.net Grade
| Pillar | NULC | USCA |
|---|---|---|
| Cost | A72 | A97Higher |
| Mission | A98Higher | A91 |
| Risk | B63Higher | C54 |
| Tradability | D26 | B61Higher |
| Holdings | C50Higher | D29 |
| Durability | D32 | C49Higher |
Rank among US Factor Index funds
Same Category. NULC and USCA are both graded against the same 30 US Factor Index funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
Our read on each fund
NULCB
USCAA
In short
NULC An ESG screen on a growth-tilted US large-cap portfolio: roughly 140 names tracking the TIAA ESG USA Large-Cap Index at 0.21% a year, under the typical US factor fund's fee.
USCA The largest US ETF debut on record when it launched in 2023, seeded by a Finnish pension fund. It owns roughly 400 US large- and mid-caps, keeping only the top half of each sector on MSCI's climate-transition scoring, for 0.07% a year.
Stated mandate
NULC The Fund seeks to track, before fees and expenses, the TIAA ESG USA Large-Cap Index.
USCA The fund seeks to track the MSCI USA Climate Action Index before fees and expenses through a passive indexing strategy. The index selects U.S. large- and mid-capitalization companies assessed as leading sector peers in climate-transition positioning and actions.
Why people hold it
Worth knowing
NULC vs USCA 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.
NULC vs USCA Cost
Overpaying NULC vs USCA
$2,877
On $10,000 over 30 years. 7% growth a year before fees, expense ratio only.
NULC 0.21%
$4,357
USCA 0.07%
$1,480
Cost over time
Year by year
| Year | NULC | USCA | Overpaying |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10 | $383 | $128 | $255 |
| 20 | $1,491 | $503 | $988 |
| 30 | $4,357 | $1,480 | $2,877 |
- 0.21%NULC
- 0.07%USCA, cheaper
- Middle half of US Factor Index funds
- Median 0.30%
USCA 2nd cheapest of 30 funds
NULC 9th cheapest of 30 funds
NULC vs USCA Dividends
- NULC 8.90%, better
- USCA 1.05%
- NULC $4.87
- USCA $0.47
- NULC $4.87
- USCA $0.10
- NULC Dec 18, 2025
- USCA Sep 18, 2026
- NULC Dec 19, 2025
- USCA Sep 25, 2026
- NULC Annual
- USCA Quarterly
Distribution history
NULC vs USCA Risk
Fall from peak · 5 years
Risk facts
- Volatility
- NULC 12.8%USCA 12.5%, better
- Return per unit of risk
- NULC 1.27USCA 1.27Same figure. Both funds show the same value, so neither comes out ahead.
- Worst fall
- NULC −27.9%USCA −19.2%
- Market sensitivity
- NULC 1.00USCA 1.00Same figure. Both funds show the same value, so neither comes out ahead.
Popular comparisons
- 0.21% · 0.05%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
- 0.07% · 0.05%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
- 0.21% · 0.15%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
- 0.07% · 0.15%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
- 0.21% · 0.25%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
- 0.07% · 0.25%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.