PCLG vs. GRW

Last updated Jun 3, 2026

PCLG (Polen Focus Growth ETF) and GRW (TCW Durable Growth ETF) are both Large Cap Growth Equities funds. Both are actively managed. A 0.50 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. PCLG charges 0.49%/yr vs 0.75%/yr for GRW.

Performance

PCLG vs. GRW - Performance Comparison

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

Returns By Period

PCLG

• 1D: -1.82%
• 1M: 4.45%
• YTD: -5.11%
• 6M: -5.23%
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

GRW

• 1D: -0.13%
• 1M: —
• YTD: —
• 6M: —
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

PCLG vs. GRW - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)
PCLG Polen Focus Growth ETF	2.22%
GRW TCW Durable Growth ETF	1.61%

Correlation

The correlation between PCLG and GRW is 0.50, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 29, 2026	0.50

Return for Risk

PCLG vs. GRW - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Polen Focus Growth ETF (PCLG) and TCW Durable Growth ETF (GRW). 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.

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

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	PCLG	GRW	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	-0.51	37.56	-38.07

Drawdowns

PCLG vs. GRW - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PCLG drawdown since its inception was -23.78%, which is greater than GRW's maximum drawdown of -0.13%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PCLG and GRW.

Drawdown Indicators

	PCLG	GRW	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-23.78%	-0.13%	-23.65%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-9.27%	-0.13%	-9.14%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-9.67%	-0.04%	-9.63%

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	PCLG	GRW	Difference
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	17.68%	9.26%	+8.42%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	17.68%	9.26%	+8.42%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	17.68%	9.26%	+8.42%

PCLG vs. GRW - Expense Ratio Comparison

PCLG has a 0.49% expense ratio, which is lower than GRW's 0.75% expense ratio.

Dividends

PCLG vs. GRW - Dividend Comparison

PCLG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.04%, while GRW has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025
GRW TCW Durable Growth ETF	0.00%	0.00%
PCLG Polen Focus Growth ETF	0.04%	0.03%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both PCLG and GRW in my portfolio?

PCLG and GRW have a correlation of 0.50, 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 GRW?

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 GRW?

PCLG is cheaper with a 0.49% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for GRW.

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

PCLG has the higher dividend yield at 0.04%, compared with 0.00% for GRW.

What is the main difference between PCLG and GRW?

They also come from different issuers: Polen and TCW. Their fees differ too: 0.49% for PCLG and 0.75% for GRW.