PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
ACGR vs. PGRO
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

ACGR vs. PGRO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in American Century Large Cap Growth ETF (ACGR) and Putnam Focused Large Cap Growth ETF (PGRO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ACGR achieves a 2.62% return, which is significantly higher than PGRO's 1.37% return.


ACGR

1D
1.97%
1M
-0.45%
6M
4.44%
YTD
2.62%
1Y
11.79%
3Y*
16.94%
5Y*
10.63%
10Y*
ALL TIME*
13.68%

PGRO

1D
0.76%
1M
-2.55%
6M
2.79%
YTD
1.37%
1Y
9.32%
3Y*
19.26%
5Y*
10.40%
10Y*
ALL TIME*
12.18%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Liquidity Comparison


PositionAvg. Volume Value (2W)Avg. Volume Value (1M)Avg. Volume Value (3M)
$29.10K$15.91K$23.50K
$9.82M$4.94M$2.18M

ACGR vs. PGRO - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024202320222021
ACGR
American Century Large Cap Growth ETF
2.62%14.50%26.66%43.24%-30.13%29.88%
PGRO
Putnam Focused Large Cap Growth ETF
1.37%15.13%34.01%45.19%-31.53%16.63%

Correlation

The correlation between ACGR and PGRO is 0.95 - they have historically moved very closely together. At this level, their price movements offset little of one another.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.

0.95

Correlation (3Y)
Balances recent behavior with more history.

0.97

Correlation (5Y)
Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period.

0.98

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since May 26, 2021

0.97

The correlation between ACGR and PGRO has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.95 to 0.98 - a consistent structural relationship.

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

ACGR vs. PGRO — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

ACGR
ACGR Risk / Return Rank: 2424
Overall Rank
ACGR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2626
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ACGR Sortino Ratio Rank: 2525
Sortino Ratio Rank
ACGR Omega Ratio Rank: 2424
Omega Ratio Rank
ACGR Calmar Ratio Rank: 2323
Calmar Ratio Rank
ACGR Martin Ratio Rank: 2525
Martin Ratio Rank

PGRO
PGRO Risk / Return Rank: 2020
Overall Rank
PGRO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2020
Sharpe Ratio Rank
PGRO Sortino Ratio Rank: 2020
Sortino Ratio Rank
PGRO Omega Ratio Rank: 1919
Omega Ratio Rank
PGRO Calmar Ratio Rank: 1919
Calmar Ratio Rank
PGRO Martin Ratio Rank: 2020
Martin Ratio Rank
The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

ACGR vs. PGRO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for American Century Large Cap Growth ETF (ACGR) and Putnam Focused Large Cap Growth ETF (PGRO). 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.

Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.


ACGRPGRODifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.18

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.23

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.11

1.08

+0.03

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

0.64

0.45

+0.19

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

1.92

1.32

+0.60

ACGR vs. PGRO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ACGR Sharpe Ratio is 0.59, which is higher than the PGRO Sharpe Ratio of 0.41. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ACGR and PGRO, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Drawdowns

ACGR vs. PGRO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ACGR drawdown since its inception was -34.54%, roughly equal to the maximum PGRO drawdown of -34.73%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ACGR and PGRO.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


ACGRPGRODifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-34.54%

-34.73%

+0.19%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-15.84%

-16.34%

+0.50%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-24.58%

-23.31%

-1.27%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-34.54%

-34.73%

+0.19%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-6.04%

-8.08%

+2.04%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-8.43%

-10.13%

+1.70%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

5.24%

5.52%

-0.28%

Volatility

ACGR vs. PGRO - Volatility Comparison

American Century Large Cap Growth ETF (ACGR) and Putnam Focused Large Cap Growth ETF (PGRO) have volatilities of 5.92% and 5.72%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


ACGRPGRODifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

5.92%

5.72%

+0.20%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

13.60%

14.18%

-0.58%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

17.13%

17.90%

-0.77%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

21.55%

22.07%

-0.52%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

21.41%

21.77%

-0.36%

ACGR vs. PGRO - Expense Ratio Comparison

ACGR has a 0.39% expense ratio, which is lower than PGRO's 0.55% expense ratio.


Dividends

ACGR vs. PGRO - Dividend Comparison

ACGR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.12%, more than PGRO's 0.02% yield.


PositionTTM202520242023202220212020
ACGR
American Century Large Cap Growth ETF
0.12%0.11%0.23%0.37%0.48%0.58%1.44%
PGRO
Putnam Focused Large Cap Growth ETF
0.02%0.02%0.08%0.19%0.12%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


With a correlation of 0.95, ACGR and PGRO move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

ACGR has higher volatility (5.92%) compared to PGRO (5.72%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ACGR dropped -34.54% vs PGRO's -34.73%.

On 5-year performance, ACGR leads with 10.63% vs 10.40% for PGRO. On fees, ACGR is cheaper at 0.39% per year. On volatility, PGRO has been the lower-risk option at 5.72%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 5-year period, ACGR has performed better with a 10.63% return vs 10.40%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

ACGR is cheaper with a 0.39% expense ratio, compared with 0.55% for PGRO.

ACGR has the higher dividend yield at 0.12%, compared with 0.02% for PGRO.

They also come from different issuers: American Century and Putnam. Their fees differ too: 0.39% for ACGR and 0.55% for PGRO.

ACGR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.59 vs 0.41), meaning it's delivered slightly more return per unit of risk over the trailing 12 months. However, this ranking shifts over time - use the Risk/Return Score above for a more comprehensive view that combines Sharpe, Sortino, and other measures used by quantitative funds.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for ACGR and PGRO

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