PCIG vs. IXC

Last updated Jul 12, 2026

PCIG (Polen Capital International Growth ETF) and IXC (iShares Global Energy ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - PCIG is a Foreign Large Cap Equities fund actively managed by Polen, while IXC is a Energy Equities fund tracking the S&P Global 1200 Energy Capped Index. PCIG is actively managed, while IXC is passively managed. Over the past year, PCIG returned -8.85% vs 29.02% for IXC. At a 0.06 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. PCIG charges 0.85%/yr vs 0.40%/yr for IXC.

Performance

PCIG vs. IXC - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Polen Capital International Growth ETF (PCIG) and iShares Global Energy ETF (IXC). 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 IXC's 23.35% return.

PCIG

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

IXC

• 1D: 0.51%
• 1M: -4.50%
• 6M: 20.68%
• YTD: 23.35%
• 1Y: 29.02%
• 3Y*: 14.69%
• 5Y*: 18.91%
• 10Y*: 8.83%

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

PCIG vs. IXC - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
PCIG Polen Capital International Growth ETF	-3.68%	-0.02%	-8.47%
IXC iShares Global Energy ETF	23.35%	13.98%	-3.90%

Correlation

The correlation between PCIG and IXC is -0.14, 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	-0.14
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 15, 2024	0.06

The correlation between PCIG and IXC shifts across timeframes, from -0.14 (1 year) to 0.06 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

PCIG vs. IXC - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	PCIG	IXC
Technology	23.3%	-
Financial Services	8.6%	-
Consumer Cyclical	8.6%	-
Communication Services	5.8%	-
Energy	5.7%	99.4%
Basic Materials	4.6%	-
Healthcare	3.4%	-
Industrials	2.2%	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Real Estate	-	-
Utilities	-	0.2%

Return for Risk

PCIG vs. IXC — 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

IXC

IXC Risk / Return Rank: 51
IXC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 58
IXC Sortino Ratio Rank: 53
IXC Omega Ratio Rank: 51
IXC Calmar Ratio Rank: 48
IXC Martin Ratio Rank: 47

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. IXC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Polen Capital International Growth ETF (PCIG) and iShares Global Energy ETF (IXC). 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	IXC	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.51	1.56	-2.07
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-0.59	2.09	-2.68
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.93	1.26	-0.33
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.46	1.95	-2.41
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-0.99	6.26	-7.25

PCIG vs. IXC - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current PCIG Sharpe Ratio is -0.51, which is lower than the IXC Sharpe Ratio of 1.56. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of PCIG and IXC, 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. IXC - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PCIG drawdown since its inception was -23.40%, smaller than the maximum IXC drawdown of -67.88%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PCIG and IXC.

Drawdown Indicators

	PCIG	IXC	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-23.40%	-67.88%	+44.48%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-21.45%	-15.36%	-6.09%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-19.06%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-24.93%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-64.16%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-12.82%	-11.22%	-1.60%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-7.39%	-17.45%	+10.06%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	9.94%	4.78%	+5.16%

Volatility

PCIG vs. IXC - Volatility Comparison

Polen Capital International Growth ETF (PCIG) and iShares Global Energy ETF (IXC) have volatilities of 6.58% and 6.59%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	PCIG	IXC	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.58%	6.59%	-0.01%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	15.99%	15.86%	+0.13%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	19.39%	19.18%	+0.21%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	18.30%	23.45%	-5.15%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	18.30%	26.81%	-8.51%

PCIG vs. IXC - Expense Ratio Comparison

PCIG has a 0.85% expense ratio, which is higher than IXC's 0.40% expense ratio.

Dividends

PCIG vs. IXC - Dividend Comparison

PCIG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.15%, less than IXC's 3.08% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
IXC iShares Global Energy ETF	3.08%	3.68%	4.56%	3.45%	4.76%	3.98%	4.86%	7.00%	3.51%	3.05%	2.86%	3.77%
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%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both PCIG and IXC in my portfolio?

PCIG and IXC 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, PCIG or IXC?

IXC has higher volatility (6.59%) compared to PCIG (6.58%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PCIG dropped -23.40% vs IXC's -67.88%.

Which ETF is better, PCIG or IXC?

On 1-year performance, IXC leads with 29.02% vs -8.85% for PCIG. On fees, IXC is cheaper at 0.40% per year. Their volatility is very similar. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, PCIG or IXC?

Over the 1-year period, IXC has performed better with a 29.02% 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 IXC?

IXC is cheaper with a 0.40% expense ratio, compared with 0.85% for PCIG.

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

IXC has the higher dividend yield at 3.08%, compared with 0.15% for PCIG.

What is the main difference between PCIG and IXC?

PCIG is categorized as Foreign Large Cap Equities, while IXC is Energy Equities. They also come from different issuers: Polen and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.85% for PCIG and 0.40% for IXC.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

IXC currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.56 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.