AAVM vs. PCLG
AAVM (Alpha Architect Global Factor Equity ETF) and PCLG (Polen Focus Growth ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - AAVM is a Multi-factor fund actively managed by Alpha Architect, while PCLG is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund actively managed by Polen. Both are actively managed. At a 0.47 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. AAVM charges 0.45%/yr vs 0.49%/yr for PCLG.
Performance
AAVM vs. PCLG - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, AAVM achieves a 17.72% return, which is significantly higher than PCLG's -5.11% return.
AAVM
- 1D
- 0.78%
- 1M
- 3.30%
- YTD
- 17.72%
- 6M
- 21.11%
- 1Y
- 34.30%
- 3Y*
- 19.71%
- 5Y*
- 7.20%
- 10Y*
- —
PCLG
- 1D
- -1.82%
- 1M
- 4.45%
- YTD
- -5.11%
- 6M
- -5.23%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
AAVM vs. PCLG - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
AAVM Alpha Architect Global Factor Equity ETF | 17.72% | 4.76% |
PCLG Polen Focus Growth ETF | -5.11% | -1.09% |
Correlation
The correlation between AAVM and PCLG is 0.47, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 1, 2025 | 0.47 |
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
Return for Risk
AAVM vs. PCLG — Risk / Return Rank
AAVM
PCLG
AAVM vs. PCLG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Alpha Architect Global Factor Equity ETF (AAVM) and Polen Focus Growth ETF (PCLG). 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.
| AAVM | PCLG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | 2.26 | — | — |
Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | 3.18 | — | — |
Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.41 | — | — |
Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.28 | — | — |
Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 13.79 | — | — |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| AAVM | PCLG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.26 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.46 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.35 | -0.51 | +0.87 |
Drawdowns
AAVM vs. PCLG - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum AAVM drawdown since its inception was -34.71%, which is greater than PCLG's maximum drawdown of -23.78%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for AAVM and PCLG.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| AAVM | PCLG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -34.71% | -23.78% | -10.93% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -10.85% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -20.23% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -23.73% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.19% | -9.27% | +9.08% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -13.32% | -9.67% | -3.65% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.58% | — | — |
Volatility
AAVM vs. PCLG - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| AAVM | PCLG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 5.08% | — | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 12.89% | — | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 15.28% | 17.68% | -2.40% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 15.68% | 17.68% | -2.00% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 14.91% | 17.68% | -2.77% |
AAVM vs. PCLG - Expense Ratio Comparison
AAVM has a 0.45% expense ratio, which is lower than PCLG's 0.49% expense ratio.
Dividends
AAVM vs. PCLG - Dividend Comparison
AAVM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.74%, more than PCLG's 0.04% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
AAVM Alpha Architect Global Factor Equity ETF | 1.74% | 2.05% | 2.54% | 4.13% | 2.24% | 0.82% | 0.00% | 1.76% | 0.93% | 0.81% |
PCLG Polen Focus Growth ETF | 0.04% | 0.03% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
AAVM and PCLG have a correlation of 0.47, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, AAVM is cheaper at 0.45% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
AAVM is cheaper with a 0.45% expense ratio, compared with 0.49% for PCLG.
AAVM has the higher dividend yield at 1.74%, compared with 0.04% for PCLG.
AAVM is categorized as Multi-factor, while PCLG is Large Cap Growth Equities. They also come from different issuers: Alpha Architect and Polen. Their fees differ too: 0.45% for AAVM and 0.49% for PCLG.
Find the right allocation for AAVM and PCLG
Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.
Open Portfolio Optimizer