PCCE vs. PCGG

Last updated Jun 25, 2026

PCCE (Polen Capital China Growth ETF) and PCGG (Polen Capital Global Growth ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - PCCE is a China Equities fund actively managed by Polen, while PCGG is a Global Equities fund actively managed by Polen. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, PCCE returned -2.41% vs -10.53% for PCGG. At a 0.33 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. PCCE charges 1.00%/yr vs 0.85%/yr for PCGG.

Performance

PCCE vs. PCGG - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Polen Capital China Growth ETF (PCCE) and Polen Capital Global Growth ETF (PCGG). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, PCCE achieves a -6.34% return, which is significantly higher than PCGG's -10.94% return.

PCCE

• 1D: -0.20%
• 1M: -5.27%
• YTD: -6.34%
• 6M: -7.50%
• 1Y: -2.41%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

PCGG

• 1D: 0.00%
• 1M: -2.85%
• YTD: -10.94%
• 6M: -11.53%
• 1Y: -10.53%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

PCCE vs. PCGG - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
PCCE Polen Capital China Growth ETF	-6.34%	23.07%	10.79%
PCGG Polen Capital Global Growth ETF	-10.94%	1.62%	3.15%

Correlation

The correlation between PCCE and PCGG is 0.43, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.43
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 15, 2024	0.33

PCCE vs. PCGG - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	PCCE	PCGG
Communication Services	20.1%	15.8%
Financial Services	19.9%	17.5%
Consumer Cyclical	17.3%	9.4%
Industrials	13.7%	-
Real Estate	8.7%	2.0%
Healthcare	8.0%	13.0%
Technology	6.1%	40.1%
Consumer Defensive	4.3%	2.3%
Basic Materials	1.8%	-
Energy	-	-
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

PCCE vs. PCGG — Risk / Return Rank

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

PCCE

PCCE Risk / Return Rank: 8
PCCE Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8
PCCE Sortino Ratio Rank: 8
PCCE Omega Ratio Rank: 7
PCCE Calmar Ratio Rank: 8
PCCE Martin Ratio Rank: 8

PCGG

PCGG Risk / Return Rank: 4
PCGG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4
PCGG Sortino Ratio Rank: 4
PCGG Omega Ratio Rank: 4
PCGG Calmar Ratio Rank: 5
PCGG Martin Ratio Rank: 4

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.

PCCE vs. PCGG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Polen Capital China Growth ETF (PCCE) and Polen Capital Global Growth ETF (PCGG). 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.

	PCCE	PCGG	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.13	-0.67	+0.54
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-0.05	-0.83	+0.78
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.99	0.90	+0.09
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.15	-0.47	+0.32
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-0.31	-1.09	+0.79

PCCE vs. PCGG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current PCCE Sharpe Ratio is -0.13, which is higher than the PCGG Sharpe Ratio of -0.67. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of PCCE and PCGG, 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

PCCE vs. PCGG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PCCE drawdown since its inception was -26.38%, which is greater than PCGG's maximum drawdown of -22.66%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PCCE and PCGG.

Drawdown Indicators

	PCCE	PCGG	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-26.38%	-22.66%	-3.72%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-16.59%	-22.66%	+6.07%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-14.53%	-15.39%	+0.86%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-10.01%	-5.11%	-4.90%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	7.91%	9.67%	-1.76%

Volatility

PCCE vs. PCGG - Volatility Comparison

Polen Capital China Growth ETF (PCCE) and Polen Capital Global Growth ETF (PCGG) have volatilities of 6.24% and 6.36%, 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

	PCCE	PCGG	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.24%	6.36%	-0.12%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	14.96%	13.06%	+1.90%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	19.28%	15.97%	+3.31%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	26.11%	16.80%	+9.31%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	26.11%	16.80%	+9.31%

PCCE vs. PCGG - Expense Ratio Comparison

PCCE has a 1.00% expense ratio, which is higher than PCGG's 0.85% expense ratio.

Dividends

PCCE vs. PCGG - Dividend Comparison

PCCE's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.44%, while PCGG has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024
PCCE Polen Capital China Growth ETF	2.44%	2.29%	1.95%
PCGG Polen Capital Global Growth ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both PCCE and PCGG in my portfolio?

PCCE and PCGG have a correlation of 0.43, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, PCCE or PCGG?

PCGG has higher volatility (6.36%) compared to PCCE (6.24%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PCCE dropped -26.38% vs PCGG's -22.66%.

Which ETF is better, PCCE or PCGG?

On 1-year performance, PCCE leads with -2.41% vs -10.53% for PCGG. On fees, PCGG is cheaper at 0.85% per year. On volatility, PCCE has been the lower-risk option at 6.24%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, PCCE or PCGG?

Over the 1-year period, PCCE has performed better with a -2.41% return vs -10.53%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, PCCE or PCGG?

PCGG is cheaper with a 0.85% expense ratio, compared with 1.00% for PCCE.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, PCCE or PCGG?

PCCE has the higher dividend yield at 2.44%, compared with 0.00% for PCGG.

What is the main difference between PCCE and PCGG?

PCCE is categorized as China Equities, while PCGG is Global Equities. Their fees differ too: 1.00% for PCCE and 0.85% for PCGG.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

PCCE currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (-0.13 vs -0.67), 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.