LCLG vs SAWG
Logan Capital Large Cap Growth ETF vs AAM Sawgrass US Large Cap Quality Growth ETF
Which is better, LCLG or SAWG?
Each has led over a different period.
SAWG has a lower expense ratio. LCLG led over the full window, SAWG over 1Y. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.91. SAWG is less concentrated, with 30.3% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 44.4%.
MarketXLS is not an investment adviser. This comparison is generated automatically from market data and is for information only. A Best mark means the better reading on that one measure, not a recommendation to buy.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | LCLG | SAWG |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.85% | 0.49%Best |
| AUM | $100M | $3M |
| Dividend Yield | 0.00% | 0.25% |
| Holdings | 114 | 2,359 |
| YTD Return | +9.92% | +12.35%Best |
| 1Y Return | +9.49% | +11.16%Best |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +25.21% | - |
| Volatility (annualized) | 19.4% | 11.6%Best |
| Max Drawdown | -25.8% | -18.7%Best |
| $10,000 over 2.3 years | $14,799Best | $13,181 |
| Top 10 Weight | 44.4% | 30.3%Best |
| Fund Family | Logan Capital | Advisors Asset Management, Inc. |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Growth | Large Cap Growth |
| Inception | Aug 8, 2022 | Jul 30, 2024 |
Not shown on this pair: 5Y Return (annualized).
Volatility and max drawdown, and the $10,000 over 2.3 years row, are measured over the window both funds cover: Jul 31, 2024 to Nov 11, 2026 (2.3 years).
LCLG vs SAWG growth
Month-end closes. Both lines start at 0% in the first month shown, so the gap between them is the difference in growth across that window. The full view covers the 2.3 years both funds cover.
LCLG vs SAWG Performance
Logan Capital Large Cap Growth ETF (LCLG) is an ETF from Logan Capital and AAM Sawgrass US Large Cap Quality Growth ETF (SAWG) is an ETF from Advisors Asset Management, Inc.. Over the past year LCLG returned +9.49% while SAWG returned +11.16%. Year to date, LCLG is up 9.92% versus a gain of 12.35% for SAWG.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
LCLG has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 19.4% compared with 11.6% for SAWG. Lower volatility generally means a smoother ride, though it often comes with lower long-run returns.
The deepest peak-to-trough decline in our data was -25.8% for LCLG and -18.7% for SAWG. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.91. They move almost in lockstep, so holding both mostly duplicates the same exposure.
Fees and Cost Over Time
LCLG charges 0.85% per year while SAWG charges 0.49%. On a $10,000 position that is $85 vs $49 annually, a gap of $36 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, LCLG currently yields 0.00% against 0.25% for SAWG.
Holdings Overlap
84.6% of LCLG's money is in holdings SAWG also owns. 22.5% of SAWG's money is in holdings LCLG also owns.
Most of LCLG is already inside SAWG. Owning both mostly buys the same companies twice.
42 positions in common, counted across the 55 positions we hold weights for in LCLG and 1,140 in SAWG, against full books of 114 and 2,359.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 416 positions for SAWG that do not appear in our book for LCLG (51.6% of the fund), and 12 for LCLG that do not appear in SAWG (14.1%).
Some of those will be the same company recorded under a different code in one of the two books, so the real difference in what you would own is no larger than this and may be smaller. We do not name the individual positions here for that reason.
Top Shared Holdings
| Stock | Weight in LCLG | Weight in SAWG | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| AAPLApple Inc | 5.19% | 5.90% | 0.71% |
| AMZNAmazon.Com Inc | 3.98% | 2.95% | 1.03% |
| MUMicron Technology, Inc. | 5.20% | 1.27% | 3.93% |
| AVGOBroadcom Inc | 4.46% | 1.90% | 2.56% |
| GOOGLAlphabet Inc | 3.82% | 2.44% | 1.38% |
| METAMeta Platforms Inc | 4.11% | 1.98% | 2.13% |
| APHAmphenol Corp. Class A | 5.72% | 0.25% | 5.47% |
| MAMastercard Inc | 4.01% | 0.58% | 3.43% |
| GOOGAlphabet Inc. C | 2.63% | 1.92% | 0.71% |
| KLACKla Corp. | 4.21% | 0.28% | 3.93% |
84.6% of LCLG is already inside SAWG.
You probably hold more than these two. Add the rest and see how much of the whole book is the same companies twice.
Free for up to 10 holdings. No account needed.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, LCLG or SAWG?
LCLG has an expense ratio of 0.85% while SAWG charges 0.49%. SAWG is the cheaper option, by $36 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, LCLG or SAWG?
Over the past year LCLG returned +9.49% vs +11.16% for SAWG, so SAWG leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (2 years), LCLG annualized +18.58% vs +12.76% for SAWG. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, LCLG or SAWG?
LCLG has been the more volatile fund at 19.4% annualized versus 11.6% for SAWG. Worst drawdown: LCLG -25.8% vs SAWG -18.7%.
Should I hold both LCLG and SAWG?
LCLG and SAWG have a monthly-return correlation of 0.91, so they move almost identically. What is left to separate them is the fee and the index each one tracks. This is information, not a recommendation.
What is the holdings overlap between LCLG and SAWG?
84.6% of LCLG's money is in holdings SAWG also owns. 22.5% of SAWG's is in holdings LCLG also owns. They hold 42 positions in common, counted across the 55 positions we hold weights for in LCLG and 1,140 in SAWG.
Which pays a higher dividend, LCLG or SAWG?
LCLG yields 0.00% while SAWG yields 0.25%, so SAWG currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is SAWG better than LCLG?
SAWG has a lower expense ratio. LCLG led over the full window, SAWG over 1Y. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.91. SAWG is less concentrated, with 30.3% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 44.4%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.