PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
PCGG vs. DBO
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

PCGG vs. DBO - Performance Comparison

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

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, PCGG achieves a -6.93% return, which is significantly lower than DBO's 84.75% return.


PCGG

1D
-1.46%
1M
1.53%
YTD
-6.93%
6M
-6.74%
1Y
-5.83%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*

DBO

1D
2.27%
1M
-2.34%
YTD
84.75%
6M
81.10%
1Y
80.26%
3Y*
21.86%
5Y*
15.98%
10Y*
11.37%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

PCGG vs. DBO - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023
PCGG
Polen Capital Global Growth ETF
-6.93%1.62%12.40%4.01%
DBO
Invesco DB Oil Fund
84.75%-11.71%7.85%-10.56%

Correlation

The correlation between PCGG and DBO is -0.26, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

-0.26

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 31, 2023

-0.10

The correlation between PCGG and DBO shifts across timeframes, from -0.26 (1 year) to -0.10 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

PCGG vs. DBO - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
PCGG
DBO

Technology

40.1%

-

Financial Services

17.5%
116.0%

Communication Services

15.8%

-

Healthcare

13.0%

-

Consumer Cyclical

9.4%

-

Consumer Defensive

2.3%

-

Real Estate

2.0%

-

Basic Materials

-

-

Energy

-

-

Industrials

-

-

Utilities

-

-

Technology

PCGG
40.1%
DBO

-

Financial Services

PCGG
17.5%
DBO
116.0%

Communication Services

PCGG
15.8%
DBO

-

Healthcare

PCGG
13.0%
DBO

-

Consumer Cyclical

PCGG
9.4%
DBO

-

Consumer Defensive

PCGG
2.3%
DBO

-

Real Estate

PCGG
2.0%
DBO

-

Basic Materials

PCGG

-

DBO

-

Energy

PCGG

-

DBO

-

Industrials

PCGG

-

DBO

-

Utilities

PCGG

-

DBO

-

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

PCGG vs. DBO — Risk / Return Rank

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

PCGG
PCGG Risk / Return Rank: 66
Overall Rank
PCGG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 55
Sharpe Ratio Rank
PCGG Sortino Ratio Rank: 55
Sortino Ratio Rank
PCGG Omega Ratio Rank: 55
Omega Ratio Rank
PCGG Calmar Ratio Rank: 66
Calmar Ratio Rank
PCGG Martin Ratio Rank: 66
Martin Ratio Rank

DBO
DBO Risk / Return Rank: 6565
Overall Rank
DBO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7070
Sharpe Ratio Rank
DBO Sortino Ratio Rank: 6262
Sortino Ratio Rank
DBO Omega Ratio Rank: 6060
Omega Ratio Rank
DBO Calmar Ratio Rank: 8383
Calmar Ratio Rank
DBO Martin Ratio Rank: 5252
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

PCGG vs. DBO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Polen Capital Global Growth ETF (PCGG) and Invesco DB Oil Fund (DBO). 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.


PCGGDBODifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-2.73

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-3.37

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

0.95

1.38

-0.43

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

-0.26

4.44

-4.69

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

-0.64

9.02

-9.66

PCGG vs. DBO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current PCGG Sharpe Ratio is -0.38, which is lower than the DBO Sharpe Ratio of 2.34. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of PCGG and DBO, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


PCGGDBODifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

-0.38

2.34

-2.73

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.50

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.36

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.22

0.02

+0.20

Drawdowns

PCGG vs. DBO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PCGG drawdown since its inception was -22.66%, smaller than the maximum DBO drawdown of -90.18%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PCGG and DBO.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


PCGGDBODifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-22.66%

-90.18%

+67.52%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-22.66%

-18.19%

-4.47%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-28.20%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-37.68%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-61.69%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-11.59%

-51.38%

+39.79%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-4.95%

-62.25%

+57.30%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

9.13%

8.92%

+0.21%

Volatility

PCGG vs. DBO - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Polen Capital Global Growth ETF (PCGG) is 3.80%, while Invesco DB Oil Fund (DBO) has a volatility of 12.61%. This indicates that PCGG experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than DBO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


PCGGDBODifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.80%

12.61%

-8.81%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

12.06%

28.20%

-16.14%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

15.27%

34.46%

-19.19%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

16.64%

32.29%

-15.65%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

16.64%

31.78%

-15.14%

PCGG vs. DBO - Expense Ratio Comparison

PCGG has a 0.85% expense ratio, which is higher than DBO's 0.78% expense ratio.


Dividends

PCGG vs. DBO - Dividend Comparison

PCGG has not paid dividends to shareholders, while DBO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.90%.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018
DBO
Invesco DB Oil Fund
1.90%3.51%4.68%4.59%0.66%0.00%0.00%1.63%1.58%
PCGG
Polen Capital Global Growth ETF
0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


PCGG and DBO have a correlation of -0.26, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

DBO has higher volatility (12.61%) compared to PCGG (3.80%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PCGG dropped -22.66% vs DBO's -90.18%.

On 1-year performance, DBO leads with 80.26% vs -5.83% for PCGG. On fees, DBO is cheaper at 0.78% per year. On volatility, PCGG has been the lower-risk option at 3.80%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, DBO has performed better with a 80.26% return vs -5.83%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

DBO is cheaper with a 0.78% expense ratio, compared with 0.85% for PCGG.

DBO has the higher dividend yield at 1.90%, compared with 0.00% for PCGG.

PCGG is categorized as Global Equities, while DBO is Oil & Gas. They also come from different issuers: Polen and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.85% for PCGG and 0.78% for DBO.

DBO currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.34 vs -0.38), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for PCGG and DBO

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