PCLG vs. IXC

Last updated Jun 3, 2026

PCLG (Polen Focus Growth ETF) and IXC (iShares Global Energy ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - PCLG is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund actively managed by Polen, while IXC is a Energy Equities fund tracking the S&P Global Energy Sector Index. PCLG is actively managed, while IXC is passively managed. At a correlation of -0.15, they often move in opposite directions. PCLG charges 0.49%/yr vs 0.46%/yr for IXC.

Performance

PCLG vs. IXC - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Polen Focus Growth ETF (PCLG) 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, PCLG achieves a -5.11% return, which is significantly lower than IXC's 31.08% return.

PCLG

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

IXC

• 1D: 1.38%
• 1M: -1.94%
• YTD: 31.08%
• 6M: 31.04%
• 1Y: 48.16%
• 3Y*: 18.50%
• 5Y*: 19.59%
• 10Y*: 10.20%

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

PCLG vs. IXC - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
PCLG Polen Focus Growth ETF	-5.11%	-1.09%
IXC iShares Global Energy ETF	31.08%	2.47%

Correlation

The correlation between PCLG and IXC 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 Oct 1, 2025	-0.15

Return for Risk

PCLG vs. IXC — Risk / Return Rank

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

IXC

IXC Risk / Return Rank: 77
IXC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 78
IXC Sortino Ratio Rank: 70
IXC Omega Ratio Rank: 69
IXC Calmar Ratio Rank: 88
IXC Martin Ratio Rank: 80

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. IXC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

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

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

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	PCLG	IXC	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	—	2.58	—
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.84	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	0.38	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	-0.51	0.32	-0.83

Drawdowns

PCLG vs. IXC - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PCLG drawdown since its inception was -23.78%, smaller than the maximum IXC drawdown of -67.88%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PCLG and IXC.

Drawdown Indicators

	PCLG	IXC	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-23.78%	-67.88%	+44.10%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	—	-9.66%	—
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	-9.27%	-5.66%	-3.61%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-9.67%	-17.48%	+7.81%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	—	3.18%	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	PCLG	IXC	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	—	7.48%	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	—	15.42%	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	17.68%	18.78%	-1.10%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	17.68%	23.49%	-5.81%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	17.68%	26.86%	-9.18%

PCLG vs. IXC - Expense Ratio Comparison

PCLG has a 0.49% expense ratio, which is higher than IXC's 0.46% expense ratio.

Dividends

PCLG vs. IXC - Dividend Comparison

PCLG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.04%, less than IXC's 2.81% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
IXC iShares Global Energy ETF	2.81%	3.68%	4.56%	3.45%	4.76%	3.98%	4.86%	7.00%	3.51%	3.05%	2.86%	3.77%
PCLG Polen Focus Growth ETF	0.04%	0.03%	0.00%	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 PCLG and IXC in my portfolio?

PCLG and IXC 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 IXC?

On fees, IXC is cheaper at 0.46% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, PCLG or IXC?

IXC is cheaper with a 0.46% expense ratio, compared with 0.49% for PCLG.

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

IXC has the higher dividend yield at 2.81%, compared with 0.04% for PCLG.

What is the main difference between PCLG and IXC?

PCLG is categorized as Large Cap Growth Equities, while IXC is Energy Equities. They also come from different issuers: Polen and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.49% for PCLG and 0.46% for IXC.