PCFI vs. SLNZ

Last updated Jul 24, 2026

PCFI (Polen Floating Rate Income ETF) and SLNZ (TCW Senior Loan ETF) are both Bank Loan funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, PCFI returned -0.62% vs 4.27% for SLNZ. At a 0.11 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. PCFI charges 0.49%/yr vs 0.65%/yr for SLNZ.

Performance

PCFI vs. SLNZ - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Polen Floating Rate Income ETF (PCFI) and TCW Senior Loan ETF (SLNZ). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, PCFI achieves a 1.10% return, which is significantly lower than SLNZ's 2.46% return.

PCFI

• 1D: 0.04%
• 1M: 1.24%
• 6M: -0.06%
• YTD: 1.10%
• 1Y: -0.62%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 2.05%

SLNZ

• 1D: -0.01%
• 1M: 0.65%
• 6M: 2.34%
• YTD: 2.46%
• 1Y: 4.27%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 5.17%

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
PCFI Polen Floating Rate Income ETF	$2.22K	$2.75K	$57.49K
SLNZ TCW Senior Loan ETF	$34.54K	$142.19K	$244.25K

PCFI vs. SLNZ - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
PCFI Polen Floating Rate Income ETF	1.10%	1.62%
SLNZ TCW Senior Loan ETF	2.46%	3.64%

Correlation

The correlation between PCFI and SLNZ is 0.14, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.14
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 24, 2025	0.11

Return for Risk

PCFI vs. SLNZ — Risk / Return Rank

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

PCFI

PCFI Risk / Return Rank: 10
PCFI Sharpe Ratio Rank: 11
PCFI Sortino Ratio Rank: 10
PCFI Omega Ratio Rank: 10
PCFI Calmar Ratio Rank: 10
PCFI Martin Ratio Rank: 11

SLNZ

SLNZ Risk / Return Rank: 41
SLNZ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 39
SLNZ Sortino Ratio Rank: 34
SLNZ Omega Ratio Rank: 41
SLNZ Calmar Ratio Rank: 46
SLNZ Martin Ratio Rank: 45

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.

PCFI vs. SLNZ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Polen Floating Rate Income ETF (PCFI) and TCW Senior Loan ETF (SLNZ). 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.

	PCFI	SLNZ	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.11	0.98	-1.09
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-0.10	1.32	-1.42
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.99	1.20	-0.21
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.15	1.67	-1.82
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-0.27	5.22	-5.49

PCFI vs. SLNZ - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current PCFI Sharpe Ratio is -0.11, which is lower than the SLNZ Sharpe Ratio of 0.98. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of PCFI and SLNZ, 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

PCFI vs. SLNZ - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PCFI drawdown since its inception was -4.01%, which is greater than SLNZ's maximum drawdown of -2.57%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PCFI and SLNZ.

Drawdown Indicators

	PCFI	SLNZ	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-4.01%	-2.57%	-1.44%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-4.01%	-2.57%	-1.44%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.40%	-0.01%	-1.39%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.76%	-0.42%	-1.34%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.27%	0.82%	+1.45%

Volatility

PCFI vs. SLNZ - Volatility Comparison

Polen Floating Rate Income ETF (PCFI) has a higher volatility of 1.14% compared to TCW Senior Loan ETF (SLNZ) at 0.53%. This indicates that PCFI's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than SLNZ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	PCFI	SLNZ	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.14%	0.53%	+0.61%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	4.25%	3.53%	+0.72%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	5.87%	4.36%	+1.51%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	7.04%	4.16%	+2.88%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	7.04%	4.16%	+2.88%

PCFI vs. SLNZ - Expense Ratio Comparison

PCFI has a 0.49% expense ratio, which is lower than SLNZ's 0.65% expense ratio.

Dividends

PCFI vs. SLNZ - Dividend Comparison

PCFI's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 9.57%, more than SLNZ's 7.48% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024
PCFI Polen Floating Rate Income ETF	9.57%	7.83%	0.00%
SLNZ TCW Senior Loan ETF	7.48%	7.39%	1.39%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both PCFI and SLNZ in my portfolio?

PCFI and SLNZ have a correlation of 0.14, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, PCFI or SLNZ?

PCFI has higher volatility (1.14%) compared to SLNZ (0.53%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PCFI dropped -4.01% vs SLNZ's -2.57%.

Which ETF is better, PCFI or SLNZ?

On 1-year performance, SLNZ leads with 4.27% vs -0.62% for PCFI. On fees, PCFI is cheaper at 0.49% per year. On volatility, SLNZ has been the lower-risk option at 0.53%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, PCFI or SLNZ?

Over the 1-year period, SLNZ has performed better with a 4.27% return vs -0.62%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, PCFI or SLNZ?

PCFI is cheaper with a 0.49% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for SLNZ.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, PCFI or SLNZ?

PCFI has the higher dividend yield at 9.57%, compared with 7.48% for SLNZ.

What is the main difference between PCFI and SLNZ?

They also come from different issuers: Polen and TCW. Their fees differ too: 0.49% for PCFI and 0.65% for SLNZ.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

SLNZ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.98 vs -0.11), 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.