PCLG vs. EIPX

Last updated Jul 18, 2026

PCLG (Polen Focus Growth ETF) and EIPX (FT Energy Income Partners Strategy ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - PCLG is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund actively managed by Polen, while EIPX is a Energy Equities fund actively managed by First Trust. Both are actively managed. At a correlation of -0.15, they often move in opposite directions. PCLG charges 0.49%/yr vs 0.95%/yr for EIPX.

Performance

PCLG vs. EIPX - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Polen Focus Growth ETF (PCLG) and FT Energy Income Partners Strategy ETF (EIPX). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, PCLG achieves a -12.34% return, which is significantly lower than EIPX's 23.75% return.

PCLG

• 1D: -1.41%
• 1M: -1.07%
• 6M: -10.82%
• YTD: -12.34%
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

EIPX

• 1D: 0.06%
• 1M: 3.87%
• 6M: 18.29%
• YTD: 23.75%
• 1Y: 29.77%
• 3Y*: 20.18%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

PCLG vs. EIPX - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
PCLG Polen Focus Growth ETF	-12.34%	-0.45%
EIPX FT Energy Income Partners Strategy ETF	23.75%	1.34%

Correlation

The correlation between PCLG and EIPX is -0.15, 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 (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 30, 2025	-0.15

Return for Risk

PCLG vs. EIPX — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments 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.

EIPX

EIPX Risk / Return Rank: 92
EIPX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 93
EIPX Sortino Ratio Rank: 93
EIPX Omega Ratio Rank: 89
EIPX Calmar Ratio Rank: 95
EIPX Martin Ratio Rank: 91

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.

PCLG vs. EIPX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Polen Focus Growth ETF (PCLG) and FT Energy Income Partners Strategy ETF (EIPX). 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	EIPX	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	—	2.61	—
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	—	3.72	—
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	—	1.44	—
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	—	5.79	—
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	—	16.07	—

Drawdowns

PCLG vs. EIPX - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PCLG drawdown since its inception was -23.78%, which is greater than EIPX's maximum drawdown of -15.43%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PCLG and EIPX.

Drawdown Indicators

	PCLG	EIPX	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-23.78%	-15.43%	-8.35%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	—	-5.17%	—
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-15.43%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-16.19%	-1.16%	-15.03%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-10.43%	-2.30%	-8.13%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	—	1.86%	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	PCLG	EIPX	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	—	4.01%	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	—	8.70%	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	17.72%	11.46%	+6.26%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	17.72%	15.00%	+2.72%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	17.72%	15.00%	+2.72%

PCLG vs. EIPX - Expense Ratio Comparison

PCLG has a 0.49% expense ratio, which is lower than EIPX's 0.95% expense ratio.

Dividends

PCLG vs. EIPX - Dividend Comparison

PCLG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.04%, less than EIPX's 2.71% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022
EIPX FT Energy Income Partners Strategy ETF	2.71%	3.23%	3.27%	3.48%	0.34%
PCLG Polen Focus Growth ETF	0.04%	0.03%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both PCLG and EIPX in my portfolio?

PCLG and EIPX have a correlation of -0.15, 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 EIPX?

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 EIPX?

PCLG is cheaper with a 0.49% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for EIPX.

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

EIPX has the higher dividend yield at 2.71%, compared with 0.04% for PCLG.

What is the main difference between PCLG and EIPX?

PCLG is categorized as Large Cap Growth Equities, while EIPX is Energy Equities. They also come from different issuers: Polen and First Trust. Their fees differ too: 0.49% for PCLG and 0.95% for EIPX.