PCLG vs. QLC
PCLG (Polen Focus Growth ETF) and QLC (FlexShares US Quality Large Cap Index Fund) are both exchange-traded funds - PCLG is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund actively managed by Polen, while QLC is a Large Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the Northern Trust Quality Large Cap Index. PCLG is actively managed, while QLC is passively managed. A 0.75 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. PCLG charges 0.49%/yr vs 0.25%/yr for QLC.
Performance
PCLG vs. QLC - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, PCLG achieves a -6.70% return, which is significantly lower than QLC's 11.39% return.
PCLG
- 1D
- -1.68%
- 1M
- 2.51%
- YTD
- -6.70%
- 6M
- -7.08%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
QLC
- 1D
- -0.74%
- 1M
- 5.38%
- YTD
- 11.39%
- 6M
- 11.88%
- 1Y
- 33.09%
- 3Y*
- 25.39%
- 5Y*
- 15.29%
- 10Y*
- 14.83%
PCLG vs. QLC - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
PCLG Polen Focus Growth ETF | -6.70% | -1.09% |
QLC FlexShares US Quality Large Cap Index Fund | 11.39% | 4.25% |
Correlation
The correlation between PCLG and QLC is 0.75, 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 Oct 1, 2025 | 0.75 |
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
Return for Risk
PCLG vs. QLC — Risk / Return Rank
PCLG
QLC
PCLG vs. QLC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Polen Focus Growth ETF (PCLG) and FlexShares US Quality Large Cap Index Fund (QLC). 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.
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| PCLG | QLC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | — | 2.69 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | — | 0.91 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | — | 0.81 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | -0.64 | 0.80 | -1.44 |
Drawdowns
PCLG vs. QLC - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum PCLG drawdown since its inception was -23.78%, smaller than the maximum QLC drawdown of -35.86%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PCLG and QLC.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| PCLG | QLC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -23.78% | -35.86% | +12.08% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | — | -8.84% | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -18.49% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -23.81% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -35.86% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -10.80% | -0.74% | -10.06% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -9.68% | -4.54% | -5.14% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | — | 1.89% | — |
Volatility
PCLG vs. QLC - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| PCLG | QLC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | — | 2.94% | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | — | 9.51% | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 17.74% | 12.38% | +5.36% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 17.74% | 16.82% | +0.92% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 17.74% | 18.42% | -0.68% |
PCLG vs. QLC - Expense Ratio Comparison
PCLG has a 0.49% expense ratio, which is higher than QLC's 0.25% expense ratio.
Dividends
PCLG vs. QLC - Dividend Comparison
PCLG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.04%, less than QLC's 0.88% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
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% |
QLC FlexShares US Quality Large Cap Index Fund | 0.88% | 0.94% | 1.03% | 1.26% | 1.46% | 0.96% | 1.40% | 1.91% | 1.82% | 1.29% | 1.80% | 0.64% |
Frequently Asked Questions
PCLG and QLC have a correlation of 0.75, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, QLC is cheaper at 0.25% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
QLC is cheaper with a 0.25% expense ratio, compared with 0.49% for PCLG.
QLC has the higher dividend yield at 0.88%, compared with 0.04% for PCLG.
PCLG is categorized as Large Cap Growth Equities, while QLC is Large Cap Blend Equities. They also come from different issuers: Polen and Northern Trust. Their fees differ too: 0.49% for PCLG and 0.25% for QLC.
Find the right allocation for PCLG and QLC
Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.
Open Portfolio Optimizer