PCIG vs. EFAS

Last updated Jul 12, 2026

PCIG (Polen Capital International Growth ETF) and EFAS (Global X MSCI SuperDividend® EAFE ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - PCIG is a Foreign Large Cap Equities fund actively managed by Polen, while EFAS is a Dividend fund tracking the MSCI EAFE Top 50 Dividend Index. PCIG is actively managed, while EFAS is passively managed. Over the past year, PCIG returned -8.85% vs 26.21% for EFAS. At a 0.37 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. PCIG charges 0.85%/yr vs 0.55%/yr for EFAS.

Performance

PCIG vs. EFAS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Polen Capital International Growth ETF (PCIG) and Global X MSCI SuperDividend® EAFE ETF (EFAS). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, PCIG achieves a -3.68% return, which is significantly lower than EFAS's 14.43% return.

PCIG

• 1D: 0.27%
• 1M: 2.15%
• 6M: -8.43%
• YTD: -3.68%
• 1Y: -8.85%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

EFAS

• 1D: 0.49%
• 1M: -0.88%
• 6M: 13.47%
• YTD: 14.43%
• 1Y: 26.21%
• 3Y*: 24.49%
• 5Y*: 12.85%
• 10Y*: —

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

PCIG vs. EFAS - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
PCIG Polen Capital International Growth ETF	-3.68%	-0.02%	-8.47%
EFAS Global X MSCI SuperDividend® EAFE ETF	14.43%	46.83%	1.95%

Correlation

The correlation between PCIG and EFAS is 0.32, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.32
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 15, 2024	0.37

PCIG vs. EFAS - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	PCIG	EFAS
Technology	23.3%	0.1%
Financial Services	8.6%	31.0%
Consumer Cyclical	8.6%	1.9%
Communication Services	5.8%	8.6%
Energy	5.7%	13.1%
Basic Materials	4.6%	1.7%
Healthcare	3.4%	0.1%
Industrials	2.2%	10.4%
Consumer Defensive	-	8.1%
Real Estate	-	11.4%
Utilities	-	13.7%

Return for Risk

PCIG vs. EFAS — Risk / Return Rank

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

PCIG

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

EFAS

EFAS Risk / Return Rank: 88
EFAS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 90
EFAS Sortino Ratio Rank: 90
EFAS Omega Ratio Rank: 87
EFAS Calmar Ratio Rank: 92
EFAS Martin Ratio Rank: 79

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.

PCIG vs. EFAS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Polen Capital International Growth ETF (PCIG) and Global X MSCI SuperDividend® EAFE ETF (EFAS). 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.

	PCIG	EFAS	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.51	2.40	-2.90
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-0.59	3.39	-3.98
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.93	1.42	-0.49
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.46	4.94	-5.40
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-0.99	12.08	-13.06

PCIG vs. EFAS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current PCIG Sharpe Ratio is -0.51, which is lower than the EFAS Sharpe Ratio of 2.40. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of PCIG and EFAS, 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

PCIG vs. EFAS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PCIG drawdown since its inception was -23.40%, smaller than the maximum EFAS drawdown of -44.38%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PCIG and EFAS.

Drawdown Indicators

	PCIG	EFAS	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-23.40%	-44.38%	+20.98%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-21.45%	-5.30%	-16.15%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-11.84%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-28.81%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-12.82%	-1.75%	-11.07%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-7.39%	-7.03%	-0.36%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	9.94%	2.16%	+7.78%

Volatility

PCIG vs. EFAS - Volatility Comparison

Polen Capital International Growth ETF (PCIG) has a higher volatility of 6.58% compared to Global X MSCI SuperDividend® EAFE ETF (EFAS) at 3.08%. This indicates that PCIG's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than EFAS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	PCIG	EFAS	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.58%	3.08%	+3.50%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	15.99%	8.70%	+7.29%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	19.39%	10.94%	+8.45%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	18.30%	15.56%	+2.74%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	18.30%	18.27%	+0.03%

PCIG vs. EFAS - Expense Ratio Comparison

PCIG has a 0.85% expense ratio, which is higher than EFAS's 0.55% expense ratio.

Dividends

PCIG vs. EFAS - Dividend Comparison

PCIG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.15%, less than EFAS's 4.77% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016
EFAS Global X MSCI SuperDividend® EAFE ETF	4.77%	4.83%	6.76%	6.33%	7.28%	5.19%	4.34%	5.75%	6.63%	6.15%	0.21%
PCIG Polen Capital International Growth ETF	0.15%	0.14%	0.36%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both PCIG and EFAS in my portfolio?

PCIG and EFAS have a correlation of 0.32, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, PCIG or EFAS?

PCIG has higher volatility (6.58%) compared to EFAS (3.08%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PCIG dropped -23.40% vs EFAS's -44.38%.

Which ETF is better, PCIG or EFAS?

On 1-year performance, EFAS leads with 26.21% vs -8.85% for PCIG. On fees, EFAS is cheaper at 0.55% per year. On volatility, EFAS has been the lower-risk option at 3.08%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, PCIG or EFAS?

Over the 1-year period, EFAS has performed better with a 26.21% return vs -8.85%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, PCIG or EFAS?

EFAS is cheaper with a 0.55% expense ratio, compared with 0.85% for PCIG.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, PCIG or EFAS?

EFAS has the higher dividend yield at 4.77%, compared with 0.15% for PCIG.

What is the main difference between PCIG and EFAS?

PCIG is categorized as Foreign Large Cap Equities, while EFAS is Dividend. They also come from different issuers: Polen and Global X. Their fees differ too: 0.85% for PCIG and 0.55% for EFAS.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

EFAS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.40 vs -0.51), 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.