AACFX vs. PGJ
Compare and contrast key facts about Invesco Greater China Fund (AACFX) and Invesco Golden Dragon China ETF (PGJ).
AACFX is managed by Invesco. It was launched on Mar 30, 2006. PGJ is a passively managed fund by Invesco that tracks the performance of the Halter USX China Index. It was launched on Dec 9, 2004.
Scroll down to visually compare performance, riskiness, drawdowns, and other indicators and decide which better suits your portfolio: AACFX or PGJ.
Correlation
The correlation between AACFX and PGJ is 0.78, which is considered to be high. That indicates a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Having highly-correlated positions in a portfolio may signal a lack of diversification, potentially leading to increased risk during market downturns.
Performance
AACFX vs. PGJ - Performance Comparison
Key characteristics
Returns By Period
AACFX
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
PGJ
-2.94%
-22.05%
-6.25%
13.52%
-7.36%
-0.98%
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
AACFX vs. PGJ - Expense Ratio Comparison
AACFX has a 1.55% expense ratio, which is higher than PGJ's 0.70% expense ratio.
Risk-Adjusted Performance
AACFX vs. PGJ — Risk-Adjusted Performance Rank
AACFX
PGJ
AACFX vs. PGJ - Risk-Adjusted Performance Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco Greater China Fund (AACFX) and Invesco Golden Dragon China ETF (PGJ). Risk-adjusted metrics are performance indicators that assess an investment's returns in relation to its risk, enabling a more accurate comparison of different investment options.
Dividends
AACFX vs. PGJ - Dividend Comparison
AACFX has not paid dividends to shareholders, while PGJ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.14%.
| TTM | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 | 2014 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
AACFX Invesco Greater China Fund | 1.28% | 1.10% | 1.94% | 1.62% | 0.06% | 0.00% | 1.04% | 1.04% | 0.54% | 0.73% | 1.07% | 0.45% |
PGJ Invesco Golden Dragon China ETF | 5.14% | 4.70% | 2.50% | 0.84% | 0.00% | 0.31% | 0.17% | 0.31% | 2.05% | 1.94% | 0.37% | 0.89% |
Drawdowns
AACFX vs. PGJ - Drawdown Comparison
Volatility
AACFX vs. PGJ - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Invesco Greater China Fund (AACFX) is 0.00%, while Invesco Golden Dragon China ETF (PGJ) has a volatility of 14.08%. This indicates that AACFX experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than PGJ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.