ATFV vs. PCLG
ATFV (Alger 35 ETF) and PCLG (Polen Focus Growth ETF) are both Large Cap Growth Equities funds. ATFV is passively managed, while PCLG is actively managed. A 0.68 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. ATFV charges 0.55%/yr vs 0.49%/yr for PCLG.
Performance
ATFV vs. PCLG - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, ATFV achieves a 16.46% return, which is significantly higher than PCLG's -6.70% return.
ATFV
- 1D
- -2.00%
- 1M
- 8.35%
- YTD
- 16.46%
- 6M
- 16.04%
- 1Y
- 48.62%
- 3Y*
- 39.26%
- 5Y*
- 15.56%
- 10Y*
- —
PCLG
- 1D
- -1.68%
- 1M
- 2.51%
- YTD
- -6.70%
- 6M
- -7.08%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
ATFV vs. PCLG - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
ATFV Alger 35 ETF | 16.46% | -1.62% |
PCLG Polen Focus Growth ETF | -6.70% | -1.09% |
Correlation
The correlation between ATFV and PCLG is 0.68, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 1, 2025 | 0.68 |
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
ATFV vs. PCLG — Risk / Return Rank
ATFV
PCLG
ATFV vs. PCLG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Alger 35 ETF (ATFV) 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.
| ATFV | PCLG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.35 | — | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.67 | — | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 9.15 | — | — |
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
| ATFV | PCLG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.12 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.59 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.59 | -0.64 | +1.23 |
Drawdowns
ATFV vs. PCLG - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum ATFV drawdown since its inception was -45.34%, which is greater than PCLG's maximum drawdown of -23.78%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ATFV and PCLG.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| ATFV | PCLG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -45.34% | -23.78% | -21.56% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -18.29% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -29.01% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -45.34% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -2.72% | -10.80% | +8.08% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -17.81% | -9.68% | -8.13% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 5.33% | — | — |
Volatility
ATFV vs. PCLG - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| ATFV | PCLG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 7.65% | — | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 17.34% | — | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 23.00% | 17.74% | +5.26% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 26.62% | 17.74% | +8.88% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 26.55% | 17.74% | +8.81% |
ATFV vs. PCLG - Expense Ratio Comparison
ATFV has a 0.55% expense ratio, which is higher than PCLG's 0.49% expense ratio.
Dividends
ATFV vs. PCLG - Dividend Comparison
ATFV's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.17%, more than PCLG's 0.04% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ATFV Alger 35 ETF | 0.17% | 0.20% | 0.16% | 0.01% | 0.06% |
PCLG Polen Focus Growth ETF | 0.04% | 0.03% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
ATFV and PCLG have a correlation of 0.68, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, PCLG is cheaper at 0.49% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
PCLG is cheaper with a 0.49% expense ratio, compared with 0.55% for ATFV.
ATFV has the higher dividend yield at 0.17%, compared with 0.04% for PCLG.
They also come from different issuers: Alger Group Holdings LLC and Polen. Their fees differ too: 0.55% for ATFV and 0.49% for PCLG.
Find the right allocation for ATFV 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