PCGG vs. PCLG
PCGG (Polen Capital Global Growth ETF) and PCLG (Polen Focus Growth ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - PCGG is a Global Equities fund actively managed by Polen, while PCLG is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund actively managed by Polen. Both are actively managed. Their correlation of 0.92 suggests significant overlap in exposure. PCGG charges 0.85%/yr vs 0.49%/yr for PCLG.
Performance
PCGG vs. PCLG - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
The year-to-date returns for both investments are quite close, with PCGG having a -6.93% return and PCLG slightly higher at -6.70%.
PCGG
- 1D
- -1.46%
- 1M
- 1.53%
- YTD
- -6.93%
- 6M
- -6.74%
- 1Y
- -5.83%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
PCLG
- 1D
- -1.68%
- 1M
- 2.51%
- YTD
- -6.70%
- 6M
- -7.08%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
PCGG vs. PCLG - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
PCGG Polen Capital Global Growth ETF | -6.93% | -2.61% |
PCLG Polen Focus Growth ETF | -6.70% | -1.09% |
Correlation
The correlation between PCGG and PCLG is 0.92, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 1, 2025 | 0.92 |
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. PCLG — Risk / Return Rank
PCGG
PCLG
PCGG vs. PCLG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Polen Capital Global Growth ETF (PCGG) and Polen Focus Growth ETF (PCLG). 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.
| PCGG | PCLG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.38 | — | — |
Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.43 | — | — |
Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 0.95 | — | — |
Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.26 | — | — |
Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -0.64 | — | — |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| PCGG | PCLG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | -0.38 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.22 | -0.64 | +0.86 |
Drawdowns
PCGG vs. PCLG - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum PCGG drawdown since its inception was -22.66%, roughly equal to the maximum PCLG drawdown of -23.78%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PCGG and PCLG.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| PCGG | PCLG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -22.66% | -23.78% | +1.12% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -22.66% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -11.59% | -10.80% | -0.79% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -4.95% | -9.68% | +4.73% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 9.13% | — | — |
Volatility
PCGG vs. PCLG - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| PCGG | PCLG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 3.80% | — | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 12.06% | — | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 15.27% | 17.74% | -2.47% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 16.64% | 17.74% | -1.10% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 16.64% | 17.74% | -1.10% |
PCGG vs. PCLG - Expense Ratio Comparison
PCGG has a 0.85% expense ratio, which is higher than PCLG's 0.49% expense ratio.
Dividends
PCGG vs. PCLG - Dividend Comparison
PCGG has not paid dividends to shareholders, while PCLG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.04%.
| Position | TTM | 2025 |
|---|---|---|
PCGG Polen Capital Global Growth ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% |
PCLG Polen Focus Growth ETF | 0.04% | 0.03% |
Frequently Asked Questions
With a correlation of 0.92, PCGG and PCLG move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.
On fees, PCLG is cheaper at 0.49% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
PCLG is cheaper with a 0.49% expense ratio, compared with 0.85% for PCGG.
PCLG has the higher dividend yield at 0.04%, compared with 0.00% for PCGG.
PCGG is categorized as Global Equities, while PCLG is Large Cap Growth Equities. Their fees differ too: 0.85% for PCGG and 0.49% for PCLG.
Find the right allocation for PCGG and PCLG
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