PGJ vs. ECNS
Compare and contrast key facts about Invesco Golden Dragon China ETF (PGJ) and iShares MSCI China Small-Cap ETF (ECNS).
PGJ and ECNS are both exchange-traded funds (ETFs), meaning they are traded on stock exchanges and can be bought and sold throughout the day. PGJ is a passively managed fund by Invesco that tracks the performance of the Halter USX China Index. It was launched on Dec 9, 2004. ECNS is a passively managed fund by iShares that tracks the performance of the MSCI China Small Cap Index. It was launched on Sep 28, 2010. Both PGJ and ECNS are passive ETFs, meaning that they are not actively managed but aim to replicate the performance of the underlying index as closely as possible.
Performance
PGJ vs. ECNS - Performance Comparison
Loading graphics...
PGJ vs. ECNS - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
PGJ Invesco Golden Dragon China ETF | -10.21% | 13.66% | 5.91% | -2.38% | -24.50% | -42.87% | 54.24% | 32.18% | -29.51% | 60.27% |
ECNS iShares MSCI China Small-Cap ETF | 0.60% | 36.49% | 5.64% | -23.05% | -24.58% | 2.11% | 25.42% | 7.84% | -18.27% | 27.55% |
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, PGJ achieves a -10.21% return, which is significantly lower than ECNS's 0.60% return. Over the past 10 years, PGJ has underperformed ECNS with an annualized return of 0.21%, while ECNS has yielded a comparatively higher 2.32% annualized return.
PGJ
- 1D
- -0.36%
- 1M
- -2.79%
- YTD
- -10.21%
- 6M
- -23.60%
- 1Y
- -10.32%
- 3Y*
- -0.75%
- 5Y*
- -14.90%
- 10Y*
- 0.21%
ECNS
- 1D
- -0.42%
- 1M
- -2.31%
- YTD
- 0.60%
- 6M
- -13.71%
- 1Y
- 24.69%
- 3Y*
- 4.78%
- 5Y*
- -5.33%
- 10Y*
- 2.32%
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
PGJ vs. ECNS - Expense Ratio Comparison
PGJ has a 0.70% expense ratio, which is higher than ECNS's 0.59% expense ratio.
Return for Risk
PGJ vs. ECNS — Risk / Return Rank
PGJ
ECNS
PGJ vs. ECNS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco Golden Dragon China ETF (PGJ) and iShares MSCI China Small-Cap ETF (ECNS). 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.
| PGJ | ECNS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.38 | 0.98 | -1.36 |
Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.36 | 1.38 | -1.74 |
Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 0.96 | 1.21 | -0.25 |
Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.41 | 1.48 | -1.89 |
Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -0.98 | 3.26 | -4.24 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading graphics...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| PGJ | ECNS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | -0.38 | 0.98 | -1.36 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | -0.34 | -0.18 | -0.16 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.01 | 0.09 | -0.08 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.12 | 0.04 | +0.08 |
Correlation
The correlation between PGJ and ECNS is 0.66, which is considered to be moderate. This suggests that the two assets have some degree of positive relationship in their price movements. Moderate correlation can be acceptable for portfolio diversification, offering a balance between risk and potential returns.
Dividends
PGJ vs. ECNS - Dividend Comparison
PGJ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.53%, less than ECNS's 6.16% yield.
| TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
PGJ Invesco Golden Dragon China ETF | 3.53% | 3.38% | 4.70% | 2.50% | 0.84% | 0.00% | 0.30% | 0.17% | 0.31% | 2.05% | 1.94% | 0.37% |
ECNS iShares MSCI China Small-Cap ETF | 6.16% | 6.20% | 5.98% | 4.89% | 3.54% | 4.87% | 3.59% | 3.23% | 6.16% | 3.18% | 4.29% | 3.58% |
Drawdowns
PGJ vs. ECNS - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum PGJ drawdown since its inception was -78.37%, which is greater than ECNS's maximum drawdown of -63.43%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PGJ and ECNS.
Loading graphics...
Drawdown Indicators
| PGJ | ECNS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -78.37% | -63.43% | -14.94% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -25.69% | -16.93% | -8.76% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -72.28% | -59.61% | -12.67% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -78.37% | -63.43% | -14.94% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -65.77% | -35.24% | -30.53% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -31.48% | -29.33% | -2.15% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 10.79% | 7.68% | +3.11% |
Volatility
PGJ vs. ECNS - Volatility Comparison
Invesco Golden Dragon China ETF (PGJ) has a higher volatility of 7.15% compared to iShares MSCI China Small-Cap ETF (ECNS) at 5.93%. This indicates that PGJ's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than ECNS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading graphics...
Volatility by Period
| PGJ | ECNS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 7.15% | 5.93% | +1.22% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 17.70% | 15.21% | +2.49% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 27.38% | 25.24% | +2.14% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 43.89% | 29.42% | +14.47% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 36.62% | 26.04% | +10.58% |