PCLG vs. RFDA
PCLG (Polen Focus Growth ETF) and RFDA (RiverFront Dynamic US Dividend Advantage ETF) are both Large Cap Growth Equities funds. Both are actively managed. A 0.60 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. PCLG charges 0.49%/yr vs 0.52%/yr for RFDA.
Performance
PCLG vs. RFDA - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, PCLG achieves a -13.43% return, which is significantly lower than RFDA's 10.77% return.
PCLG
- 1D
- -1.11%
- 1M
- -5.24%
- YTD
- -13.43%
- 6M
- -13.98%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
RFDA
- 1D
- 0.22%
- 1M
- 0.36%
- YTD
- 10.77%
- 6M
- 9.90%
- 1Y
- 26.59%
- 3Y*
- 18.80%
- 5Y*
- 12.89%
- 10Y*
- 13.39%
PCLG vs. RFDA - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
PCLG Polen Focus Growth ETF | -13.43% | -0.45% |
RFDA RiverFront Dynamic US Dividend Advantage ETF | 10.77% | 2.34% |
Correlation
The correlation between PCLG and RFDA is 0.60, 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 Sep 30, 2025 | 0.60 |
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. RFDA — Risk / Return Rank
PCLG
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
RFDA
PCLG vs. RFDA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Polen Focus Growth ETF (PCLG) and RiverFront Dynamic US Dividend Advantage ETF (RFDA). 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 | RFDA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | — | 1.42 | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | — | 4.90 | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | — | 17.52 | — |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
PCLG vs. RFDA - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum PCLG drawdown since its inception was -23.78%, smaller than the maximum RFDA drawdown of -34.60%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PCLG and RFDA.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| PCLG | RFDA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -23.78% | -34.60% | +10.82% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | — | -5.45% | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -19.35% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -19.35% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -34.60% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -17.23% | -1.67% | -15.56% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -9.95% | -3.73% | -6.22% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | — | 1.52% | — |
Volatility
PCLG vs. RFDA - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| PCLG | RFDA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | — | 3.29% | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | — | 8.77% | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 18.09% | 11.72% | +6.37% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 18.09% | 15.75% | +2.34% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 18.09% | 16.87% | +1.22% |
PCLG vs. RFDA - Expense Ratio Comparison
PCLG has a 0.49% expense ratio, which is lower than RFDA's 0.52% expense ratio.
Dividends
PCLG vs. RFDA - Dividend Comparison
PCLG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.04%, less than RFDA's 1.80% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
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% |
RFDA RiverFront Dynamic US Dividend Advantage ETF | 1.80% | 1.89% | 2.23% | 2.68% | 3.57% | 1.44% | 1.62% | 1.87% | 2.44% | 1.90% | 0.98% |
Frequently Asked Questions
PCLG and RFDA have a correlation of 0.60, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
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.
PCLG is cheaper with a 0.49% expense ratio, compared with 0.52% for RFDA.
RFDA has the higher dividend yield at 1.80%, compared with 0.04% for PCLG.
They also come from different issuers: Polen and SS&C. Their fees differ too: 0.49% for PCLG and 0.52% for RFDA.
Find the right allocation for PCLG and RFDA
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