Screener
FFTY vs TGRW
CapForce IBD 50 ETF vs T. Rowe Price Growth Stock ETF
Key differences
- TGRW costs 0.28% less per year.
- TGRW is significantly larger than FFTY — larger funds tend to be more liquid and less likely to close.
- FFTY follows a index tracking strategy; TGRW uses active selection.
- Over the last 3 years, TGRW has delivered higher annualized returns.
- FFTY has a longer track record, which may reduce uncertainty around long-term behavior.
Side-by-side comparison
| FFTY | TGRW | |
|---|---|---|
| Annual cost (TER) | 0.80% | 0.52% |
| Fund size (AUM) | $88M | $972M |
| Since | 2015 | 2020 |
| Dividend yield | 1.23% | 0.00% |
| Asset class | equity | equity |
| Region | north america | north america |
| Strategy | index tracking | active selection |
| CAGR 1Y | +38.1% | +23.2% |
| CAGR 3Y | +21.2% | +23.8% |
| CAGR 5Y | -1.1% | +10.0% |
| Sharpe 3Y | 0.68 | 1.00 |
| Volatility 1Y | 34.00% | 16.62% |
| Max drawdown | -59.46% | -43.33% |
Green dot indicates the better value for that metric. Performance data is historical and does not predict future results.
Similar to FFTY and TGRW
Explore further