LRGG vs REGS
Nomura Focused Large Growth ETF vs Columbia Large Cap Growth ETF
Which is better, LRGG or REGS?
REGS has been ahead.
REGS has a lower expense ratio. REGS led over 1Y. REGS is less concentrated, with 49.2% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 70.5%.
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 | LRGG | REGS |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.44% | 0.35%Best |
| AUM | $288M | $77M |
| Dividend Yield | 0.15% | 0.00% |
| Holdings | 44 | 124 |
| YTD Return | +4.27% | +15.98%Best |
| 1Y Return | +4.21% | - |
| Top 10 Weight | 70.5% | 49.2%Best |
| Fund Family | Nomura Asset Management Co Ltd | Columbia Threadneedle Investments |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Growth | Large Cap Growth |
| Inception | May 14, 2024 | Mar 16, 2026 |
Not shown on this pair: 3Y Return (annualized), 5Y Return (annualized), Volatility (annualized), Max Drawdown, $10,000 over the window.
LRGG vs REGS 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 is available from the range buttons; it is not the opening view here because over the whole period one of these two funds moves so much further than the other that its line would sit flat on the axis.
LRGG vs REGS Performance
Nomura Focused Large Growth ETF (LRGG) is an ETF from Nomura Asset Management Co Ltd and Columbia Large Cap Growth ETF (REGS) is an ETF from Columbia Threadneedle Investments. Year to date, LRGG is up 4.27% versus a gain of 15.98% for REGS.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Fees and Cost Over Time
LRGG charges 0.44% per year while REGS charges 0.35%. On a $10,000 position that is $44 vs $35 annually, a gap of $9 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, LRGG currently yields 0.15% against 0.00% for REGS.
Holdings Overlap
49.2% of LRGG's money is in holdings REGS also owns. 31.4% of REGS's money is in holdings LRGG also owns.
The two portfolios partly overlap.
6 positions in common, counted across the 21 positions we hold weights for in LRGG and 60 in REGS, against full books of 44 and 124.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 52 positions for REGS that do not appear in our book for LRGG (64.4% of the fund), and 12 for LRGG that do not appear in REGS (40.7%).
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.
49.2% of LRGG is already inside REGS.
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, LRGG or REGS?
LRGG has an expense ratio of 0.44% while REGS charges 0.35%. REGS is the cheaper option, by $9 a year on a $10,000 investment.
What is the holdings overlap between LRGG and REGS?
49.2% of LRGG's money is in holdings REGS also owns. 31.4% of REGS's is in holdings LRGG also owns. They hold 6 positions in common, counted across the 21 positions we hold weights for in LRGG and 60 in REGS.
Which pays a higher dividend, LRGG or REGS?
LRGG yields 0.15% while REGS yields 0.00%, so LRGG currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is REGS better than LRGG?
REGS has a lower expense ratio. REGS led over 1Y. REGS is less concentrated, with 49.2% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 70.5%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.