PGJ vs. PPA
PGJ (Invesco Golden Dragon China ETF) and PPA (Invesco Aerospace & Defense ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - PGJ is a China Equities fund tracking the Halter USX China Index, while PPA is a Aerospace & Defense fund tracking the SPADE Defense Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, PGJ returned -0.16%/yr vs 16.94%/yr for PPA. At a 0.49 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. PGJ charges 0.70%/yr vs 0.58%/yr for PPA.
Performance
PGJ vs. PPA - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, PGJ achieves a -15.55% return, which is significantly lower than PPA's 7.70% return. Over the past 10 years, PGJ has underperformed PPA with an annualized return of -0.16%, while PPA has yielded a comparatively higher 16.94% annualized return.
PGJ
- 1D
- -1.70%
- 1M
- 2.84%
- 6M
- -17.69%
- YTD
- -15.55%
- 1Y
- -16.64%
- 3Y*
- -1.10%
- 5Y*
- -12.61%
- 10Y*
- -0.16%
PPA
- 1D
- -0.17%
- 1M
- -5.11%
- 6M
- -6.71%
- YTD
- 7.70%
- 1Y
- 15.25%
- 3Y*
- 26.43%
- 5Y*
- 18.80%
- 10Y*
- 16.94%
PGJ vs. PPA - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
PGJ Invesco Golden Dragon China ETF | -15.55% | 13.66% | 5.91% | -2.38% | -24.50% | -42.87% | 54.24% | 32.18% | -29.51% | 60.27% |
PPA Invesco Aerospace & Defense ETF | 7.70% | 37.15% | 25.28% | 18.41% | 9.52% | 7.09% | 0.45% | 39.63% | -7.51% | 30.10% |
Correlation
The correlation between PGJ and PPA is 0.29, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.29 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.25 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.30 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.33 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 26, 2005 | 0.49 |
The correlation between PGJ and PPA shifts across timeframes, from 0.25 (3 years) to 0.49 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
PGJ vs. PPA - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
PGJ
PPA
Consumer Cyclical
Communication Services
Technology
Consumer Defensive
-
Financial Services
Real Estate
-
Industrials
Energy
-
Healthcare
-
Basic Materials
-
-
Utilities
-
-
Consumer Cyclical
PGJ
PPA
Communication Services
PGJ
PPA
Technology
PGJ
PPA
Consumer Defensive
PGJ
PPA
-
Financial Services
PGJ
PPA
Real Estate
PGJ
PPA
-
Industrials
PGJ
PPA
Energy
PGJ
PPA
-
Healthcare
PGJ
PPA
-
Basic Materials
PGJ
-
PPA
-
Utilities
PGJ
-
PPA
-
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
PGJ vs. PPA — Risk / Return Rank
PGJ
PPA
PGJ vs. PPA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco Golden Dragon China ETF (PGJ) and Invesco Aerospace & Defense ETF (PPA). 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.
| PGJ | PPA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -1.42 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -2.08 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 0.91 | 1.14 | -0.23 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.48 | 1.12 | -1.59 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -0.98 | 2.94 | -3.92 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
PGJ vs. PPA - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum PGJ drawdown since its inception was -78.37%, which is greater than PPA's maximum drawdown of -57.37%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PGJ and PPA.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| PGJ | PPA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -78.37% | -57.37% | -21.00% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -35.08% | -13.71% | -21.37% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -35.08% | -15.24% | -19.84% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -66.49% | -18.37% | -48.12% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -78.37% | -43.92% | -34.45% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -67.81% | -9.11% | -58.70% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -31.94% | -9.17% | -22.77% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 16.96% | 5.20% | +11.76% |
Volatility
PGJ vs. PPA - Volatility Comparison
Invesco Golden Dragon China ETF (PGJ) has a higher volatility of 7.38% compared to Invesco Aerospace & Defense ETF (PPA) at 5.40%. This indicates that PGJ's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than PPA based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| PGJ | PPA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 7.38% | 5.40% | +1.98% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 17.54% | 16.49% | +1.05% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 24.84% | 20.45% | +4.39% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 43.68% | 18.76% | +24.92% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 36.73% | 20.74% | +15.99% |
PGJ vs. PPA - Expense Ratio Comparison
PGJ has a 0.70% expense ratio, which is higher than PPA's 0.58% expense ratio.
Dividends
PGJ vs. PPA - Dividend Comparison
PGJ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.16%, more than PPA's 0.38% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
PGJ Invesco Golden Dragon China ETF | 3.16% | 3.38% | 4.70% | 2.50% | 0.84% | 0.00% | 0.30% | 0.17% | 0.31% | 2.05% | 1.94% | 0.37% |
PPA Invesco Aerospace & Defense ETF | 0.38% | 0.42% | 0.61% | 0.67% | 0.83% | 0.59% | 0.88% | 0.95% | 0.90% | 0.67% | 1.70% | 1.41% |
Frequently Asked Questions
PGJ and PPA have a correlation of 0.29, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
PGJ has higher volatility (7.38%) compared to PPA (5.40%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PGJ dropped -78.37% vs PPA's -57.37%.
On 10-year performance, PPA leads with 16.94% vs -0.16% for PGJ. On fees, PPA is cheaper at 0.58% per year. On volatility, PPA has been the lower-risk option at 5.40%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 10-year period, PPA has performed better with a 16.94% return vs -0.16%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
PPA is cheaper with a 0.58% expense ratio, compared with 0.70% for PGJ.
PGJ has the higher dividend yield at 3.16%, compared with 0.38% for PPA.
PGJ is categorized as China Equities, while PPA is Aerospace & Defense. PGJ tracks Halter USX China Index, while PPA tracks SPADE Defense Index. Their fees differ too: 0.70% for PGJ and 0.58% for PPA.
PPA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.75 vs -0.67), meaning it's delivered slightly more return per unit of risk over the trailing 12 months. However, this ranking shifts over time - use the Risk/Return Score above for a more comprehensive view that combines Sharpe, Sortino, and other measures used by quantitative funds.
Find the right allocation for PGJ and PPA
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