PCLG vs. ATFV

Last updated Aug 2, 2026

PCLG (Polen Focus Growth ETF) and ATFV (Alger 35 ETF) are both Large Cap Growth Equities funds. PCLG is actively managed, while ATFV is passively managed. Their 0.64 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. PCLG charges 0.49%/yr vs 0.55%/yr for ATFV.

Performance

PCLG vs. ATFV - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Polen Focus Growth ETF (PCLG) and Alger 35 ETF (ATFV). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, PCLG achieves a -10.48% return, which is significantly lower than ATFV's 10.01% return.

PCLG

• 1D: 1.56%
• 1M: 1.26%
• 6M: -5.05%
• YTD: -10.48%
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: —

ATFV

• 1D: 2.68%
• 1M: -2.89%
• 6M: 12.26%
• YTD: 10.01%
• 1Y: 26.14%
• 3Y*: 33.90%
• 5Y*: 12.57%
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 13.54%

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
ATFV Alger 35 ETF	$2.07M	$1.55M	$2.50M
PCLG Polen Focus Growth ETF	$245.51K	$362.92K	$565.57K

PCLG vs. ATFV - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
PCLG Polen Focus Growth ETF	-10.48%	-0.45%
ATFV Alger 35 ETF	10.01%	-1.51%

Correlation

The correlation between PCLG and ATFV is 0.64, which is moderate. They have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently, sharing some price drivers without tracking each other closely.

	Correlation
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 30, 2025	0.64

Return for Risk

PCLG vs. ATFV — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

PCLG

Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.

ATFV

ATFV Risk / Return Rank: 35
ATFV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 34
ATFV Sortino Ratio Rank: 35
ATFV Omega Ratio Rank: 33
ATFV Calmar Ratio Rank: 36
ATFV Martin Ratio Rank: 37

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

PCLG vs. ATFV - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Polen Focus Growth ETF (PCLG) and Alger 35 ETF (ATFV). 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.

	PCLG	ATFV	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	—	0.84	—
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	—	1.32	—
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	—	1.16	—
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	—	1.23	—
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	—	3.72	—

Drawdowns

PCLG vs. ATFV - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PCLG drawdown since its inception was -23.78%, smaller than the maximum ATFV drawdown of -45.34%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PCLG and ATFV.

Drawdown Indicators

	PCLG	ATFV	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-23.78%	-45.34%	+21.56%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	—	-18.29%	—
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-29.01%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-45.34%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-14.41%	-8.11%	-6.30%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-10.73%	-17.46%	+6.73%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	—	6.05%	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	PCLG	ATFV	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	—	10.70%	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	—	21.93%	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	17.93%	26.95%	-9.02%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	17.93%	27.36%	-9.43%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	17.93%	26.99%	-9.06%

PCLG vs. ATFV - Expense Ratio Comparison

PCLG has a 0.49% expense ratio, which is lower than ATFV's 0.55% expense ratio.

Dividends

PCLG vs. ATFV - Dividend Comparison

PCLG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.04%, less than ATFV's 0.18% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022
ATFV Alger 35 ETF	0.18%	0.20%	0.16%	0.01%	0.06%
PCLG Polen Focus Growth ETF	0.04%	0.03%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both PCLG and ATFV in my portfolio?

PCLG and ATFV have a correlation of 0.64, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, PCLG or ATFV?

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.

Which ETF is cheaper, PCLG or ATFV?

PCLG is cheaper with a 0.49% expense ratio, compared with 0.55% for ATFV.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, PCLG or ATFV?

ATFV has the higher dividend yield at 0.18%, compared with 0.04% for PCLG.

What is the main difference between PCLG and ATFV?

They also come from different issuers: Polen and Alger. Their fees differ too: 0.49% for PCLG and 0.55% for ATFV.