ATFV vs. PWB

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

ATFV (Alger 35 ETF) and PWB (Invesco Dynamic Large Cap Growth ETF) are both Large Cap Growth Equities funds - ATFV tracks the S&P 500 while PWB tracks the Dynamic Large Cap Growth Intellidex Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, ATFV returned 13.59%/yr vs 17.17%/yr for PWB. Their correlation of 0.86 suggests significant overlap in exposure. ATFV charges 0.55%/yr vs 0.56%/yr for PWB.

Performance

ATFV vs. PWB - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Alger 35 ETF (ATFV) and Invesco Dynamic Large Cap Growth ETF (PWB). 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 lower than PWB's 26.79% return.

ATFV

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

PWB

• 1D: -4.36%
• 1M: 4.17%
• YTD: 26.79%
• 6M: 24.81%
• 1Y: 42.75%
• 3Y*: 32.92%
• 5Y*: 17.17%
• 10Y*: 18.61%

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

ATFV vs. PWB - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
ATFV Alger 35 ETF	14.32%	38.20%	46.14%	32.75%	-35.97%	3.03%
PWB Invesco Dynamic Large Cap Growth ETF	26.79%	24.94%	31.04%	30.61%	-25.81%	14.24%

Correlation

The correlation between ATFV and PWB is 0.82, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.82
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.83
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.86
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 4, 2021	0.86

The correlation between ATFV and PWB has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.82 to 0.86 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

ATFV vs. PWB — 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

PWB

PWB Risk / Return Rank: 68
PWB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 68
PWB Sortino Ratio Rank: 60
PWB Omega Ratio Rank: 62
PWB Calmar Ratio Rank: 73
PWB Martin Ratio Rank: 79

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. PWB - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Alger 35 ETF (ATFV) and Invesco Dynamic Large Cap Growth ETF (PWB). 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	PWB	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.75	2.08	-0.33
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.36	2.67	-0.32
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.29	1.36	-0.07
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.36	3.55	-1.19
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	7.90	14.75	-6.85

ATFV vs. PWB - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ATFV Sharpe Ratio is 1.75, which is comparable to the PWB Sharpe Ratio of 2.08. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ATFV and PWB, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

ATFV vs. PWB - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ATFV drawdown since its inception was -45.34%, smaller than the maximum PWB drawdown of -52.58%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ATFV and PWB.

Drawdown Indicators

	ATFV	PWB	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-45.34%	-52.58%	+7.24%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-18.29%	-12.11%	-6.18%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-29.01%	-22.10%	-6.91%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-45.34%	-31.41%	-13.93%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-32.36%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-4.50%	-4.36%	-0.14%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-17.68%	-8.22%	-9.46%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	5.46%	2.91%	+2.55%

Volatility

ATFV vs. PWB - Volatility Comparison

Alger 35 ETF (ATFV) and Invesco Dynamic Large Cap Growth ETF (PWB) have volatilities of 10.85% and 10.34%, 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.

Volatility by Period

	ATFV	PWB	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	10.85%	10.34%	+0.51%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	19.23%	17.43%	+1.80%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	24.74%	20.72%	+4.02%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	26.92%	21.41%	+5.51%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	26.73%	20.91%	+5.82%

ATFV vs. PWB - Expense Ratio Comparison

ATFV has a 0.55% expense ratio, which is lower than PWB's 0.56% expense ratio.

Dividends

ATFV vs. PWB - Dividend Comparison

ATFV's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.18%, while PWB has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
ATFV Alger 35 ETF	0.18%	0.20%	0.16%	0.01%	0.06%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
PWB Invesco Dynamic Large Cap Growth ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.08%	0.37%	0.31%	0.04%	0.21%	0.58%	0.97%	0.54%	0.82%	0.67%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both ATFV and PWB in my portfolio?

ATFV and PWB have a correlation of 0.82, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, ATFV or PWB?

ATFV has higher volatility (10.85%) compared to PWB (10.34%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ATFV dropped -45.34% vs PWB's -52.58%.

Which ETF is better, ATFV or PWB?

On 5-year performance, PWB leads with 17.17% vs 13.59% for ATFV. On fees, ATFV is cheaper at 0.55% per year. On volatility, PWB has been the lower-risk option at 10.34%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, ATFV or PWB?

Over the 5-year period, PWB has performed better with a 17.17% return vs 13.59%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, ATFV or PWB?

ATFV is cheaper with a 0.55% expense ratio, compared with 0.56% for PWB.

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

ATFV has the higher dividend yield at 0.18%, compared with 0.00% for PWB.

What is the main difference between ATFV and PWB?

ATFV tracks S&P 500, while PWB tracks Dynamic Large Cap Growth Intellidex Index. They also come from different issuers: Alger Group Holdings LLC and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.55% for ATFV and 0.56% for PWB.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

PWB currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.08 vs 1.75), 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.