ATFV vs. PCLG

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

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 0.70 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

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Alger 35 ETF (ATFV) and Polen Focus Growth ETF (PCLG). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ATFV achieves a 14.32% return, which is significantly higher than PCLG's -13.43% return.

ATFV

• 1D: -2.39%
• 1M: 1.71%
• YTD: 14.32%
• 6M: 12.11%
• 1Y: 42.99%
• 3Y*: 37.40%
• 5Y*: 13.59%
• 10Y*: —

PCLG

• 1D: -1.11%
• 1M: -5.24%
• YTD: -13.43%
• 6M: -13.98%
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

ATFV vs. PCLG - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
ATFV Alger 35 ETF	14.32%	-1.51%
PCLG Polen Focus Growth ETF	-13.43%	-0.45%

Correlation

The correlation between ATFV and PCLG is 0.70, 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 Sep 30, 2025	0.70

Return for Risk

ATFV vs. PCLG — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

ATFV

ATFV Risk / Return Rank: 50
ATFV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 54
ATFV Sortino Ratio Rank: 50
ATFV Omega Ratio Rank: 48
ATFV Calmar Ratio Rank: 50
ATFV Martin Ratio Rank: 49

PCLG

Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.

The rank (0–100) shows how this investment's returns compare to the risk taken. Higher = better. Based on the past 12 months of data, combining Sharpe, Sortino, and other metrics used by quantitative funds and institutional investors.

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.

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.

	ATFV	PCLG	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.75	—	—
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.36	—	—
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.29	—	—
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.36	—	—
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	7.90	—	—

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.

Drawdown Indicators

	ATFV	PCLG	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest 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 Drawdown Current decline from peak	-4.50%	-17.23%	+12.73%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-17.68%	-9.95%	-7.73%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	5.46%	—	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	ATFV	PCLG	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	10.85%	—	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	19.23%	—	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	24.74%	18.09%	+6.65%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	26.92%	18.09%	+8.83%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	26.73%	18.09%	+8.64%

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 0.18%, more than PCLG's 0.04% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022
ATFV Alger 35 ETF	0.18%	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

Can I hold both ATFV and PCLG in my portfolio?

ATFV and PCLG have a correlation of 0.70, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, ATFV or PCLG?

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.

Which ETF is cheaper, ATFV or PCLG?

PCLG is cheaper with a 0.49% expense ratio, compared with 0.55% for ATFV.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, ATFV or PCLG?

ATFV has the higher dividend yield at 0.18%, compared with 0.04% for PCLG.

What is the main difference between ATFV and 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.