PCGG vs. GSIB

In the year-to-date period, PCGG achieves a 0.21% return, which is significantly lower than GSIB's 22.77% return.

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.

PCGG has a 0.85% expense ratio, which is higher than GSIB's 0.35% expense ratio.

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Polen Capital Global Growth ETF (PCGG) and Themes Global Systemically Important Banks ETF (GSIB). 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.

The current PCGG Sharpe Ratio is 0.34, which is lower than the GSIB Sharpe Ratio of 1.76. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of PCGG and GSIB, offering insights into how both investments have performed under varying market conditions. These values are calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months.

PCGG has not paid dividends to shareholders, while GSIB's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.36%.

The maximum PCGG drawdown since its inception was -20.22%, which is greater than GSIB's maximum drawdown of -17.71%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PCGG and GSIB. For additional features, visit the drawdowns tool.

Polen Capital Global Growth ETF (PCGG) has a higher volatility of 6.30% compared to Themes Global Systemically Important Banks ETF (GSIB) at 4.64%. This indicates that PCGG's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than GSIB based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.