PGJ vs. XLG

Last updated Jul 18, 2026

PGJ (Invesco Golden Dragon China ETF) and XLG (Invesco S&P 500 Top 50 ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - PGJ is a China Equities fund tracking the Halter USX China Index, while XLG is a S&P 500 fund tracking the S&P 500 Top 50 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, PGJ returned -0.16%/yr vs 16.35%/yr for XLG. A 0.57 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. PGJ charges 0.70%/yr vs 0.20%/yr for XLG.

Performance

PGJ vs. XLG - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Invesco Golden Dragon China ETF (PGJ) and Invesco S&P 500 Top 50 ETF (XLG). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, PGJ achieves a -15.55% return, which is significantly lower than XLG's 2.78% return. Over the past 10 years, PGJ has underperformed XLG with an annualized return of -0.16%, while XLG has yielded a comparatively higher 16.35% 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%

XLG

• 1D: -1.20%
• 1M: -0.63%
• 6M: 3.54%
• YTD: 2.78%
• 1Y: 15.00%
• 3Y*: 20.10%
• 5Y*: 13.92%
• 10Y*: 16.35%

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

PGJ vs. XLG - 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%
XLG Invesco S&P 500 Top 50 ETF	2.78%	19.51%	33.49%	38.16%	-24.29%	30.77%	24.15%	32.04%	-3.59%	23.04%

Correlation

The correlation between PGJ and XLG is 0.47, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.47
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.39
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.42
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.49
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 10, 2005	0.57

The correlation between PGJ and XLG shifts across timeframes, from 0.39 (3 years) to 0.57 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

PGJ vs. XLG - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	PGJ	XLG
Consumer Cyclical	44.4%	10.1%
Communication Services	26.3%	13.9%
Technology	11.4%	48.7%
Consumer Defensive	7.6%	5.0%
Financial Services	3.9%	9.9%
Real Estate	3.1%	-
Industrials	2.6%	2.1%
Energy	2.1%	2.2%
Healthcare	0.7%	6.7%
Basic Materials	-	0.6%
Utilities	-	0.8%

Return for Risk

PGJ vs. XLG — Risk / Return Rank

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

PGJ

PGJ Risk / Return Rank: 4
PGJ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4
PGJ Sortino Ratio Rank: 4
PGJ Omega Ratio Rank: 4
PGJ Calmar Ratio Rank: 5
PGJ Martin Ratio Rank: 5

XLG

XLG Risk / Return Rank: 33
XLG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 35
XLG Sortino Ratio Rank: 34
XLG Omega Ratio Rank: 33
XLG Calmar Ratio Rank: 30
XLG Martin Ratio Rank: 33

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.

PGJ vs. XLG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco Golden Dragon China ETF (PGJ) and Invesco S&P 500 Top 50 ETF (XLG). 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	XLG	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.67	1.06	-1.73
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-0.86	1.51	-2.37
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.91	1.19	-0.28
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.48	1.21	-1.69
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-0.98	4.01	-4.99

PGJ vs. XLG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current PGJ Sharpe Ratio is -0.67, which is lower than the XLG Sharpe Ratio of 1.06. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of PGJ and XLG, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

PGJ vs. XLG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PGJ drawdown since its inception was -78.37%, which is greater than XLG's maximum drawdown of -52.39%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PGJ and XLG.

Drawdown Indicators

	PGJ	XLG	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-78.37%	-52.39%	-25.98%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-35.08%	-12.41%	-22.67%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-35.08%	-20.70%	-14.38%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-66.49%	-28.02%	-38.47%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-78.37%	-30.46%	-47.91%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-67.81%	-5.83%	-61.98%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-31.94%	-7.63%	-24.31%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	16.96%	3.75%	+13.21%

Volatility

PGJ vs. XLG - Volatility Comparison

Invesco Golden Dragon China ETF (PGJ) has a higher volatility of 7.38% compared to Invesco S&P 500 Top 50 ETF (XLG) at 4.75%. This indicates that PGJ's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than XLG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	PGJ	XLG	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	7.38%	4.75%	+2.63%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	17.54%	11.19%	+6.35%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	24.84%	14.25%	+10.59%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	43.68%	18.83%	+24.85%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	36.73%	18.88%	+17.85%

PGJ vs. XLG - Expense Ratio Comparison

PGJ has a 0.70% expense ratio, which is higher than XLG's 0.20% expense ratio.

Dividends

PGJ vs. XLG - Dividend Comparison

PGJ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.16%, more than XLG's 0.65% 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%
XLG Invesco S&P 500 Top 50 ETF	0.65%	0.64%	0.72%	0.97%	1.34%	0.94%	1.25%	1.58%	2.00%	1.85%	2.00%	2.09%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both PGJ and XLG in my portfolio?

PGJ and XLG have a correlation of 0.47, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, PGJ or XLG?

PGJ has higher volatility (7.38%) compared to XLG (4.75%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PGJ dropped -78.37% vs XLG's -52.39%.

Which ETF is better, PGJ or XLG?

On 10-year performance, XLG leads with 16.35% vs -0.16% for PGJ. On fees, XLG is cheaper at 0.20% per year. On volatility, XLG has been the lower-risk option at 4.75%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, PGJ or XLG?

Over the 10-year period, XLG has performed better with a 16.35% return vs -0.16%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, PGJ or XLG?

XLG is cheaper with a 0.20% expense ratio, compared with 0.70% for PGJ.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, PGJ or XLG?

PGJ has the higher dividend yield at 3.16%, compared with 0.65% for XLG.

What is the main difference between PGJ and XLG?

PGJ is categorized as China Equities, while XLG is S&P 500. PGJ tracks Halter USX China Index, while XLG tracks S&P 500 Top 50 Index. Their fees differ too: 0.70% for PGJ and 0.20% for XLG.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

XLG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.06 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.