PGRO vs. SMMU

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

PGRO (Putnam Focused Large Cap Growth ETF) and SMMU (PIMCO Short Term Municipal Bond Active ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - PGRO is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund actively managed by Power Corporation of Canada, while SMMU is a Municipal Bonds fund actively managed by PIMCO. Both are actively managed. Over the past 5 years, PGRO returned 14.11%/yr vs 1.90%/yr for SMMU. At a 0.12 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. PGRO charges 0.55%/yr vs 0.35%/yr for SMMU.

Performance

PGRO vs. SMMU - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Putnam Focused Large Cap Growth ETF (PGRO) and PIMCO Short Term Municipal Bond Active ETF (SMMU). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, PGRO achieves a 9.11% return, which is significantly higher than SMMU's 1.10% return.

PGRO

• 1D: -0.97%
• 1M: 6.31%
• YTD: 9.11%
• 6M: 8.47%
• 1Y: 25.32%
• 3Y*: 24.74%
• 5Y*: 14.11%
• 10Y*: —

SMMU

• 1D: 0.07%
• 1M: 0.31%
• YTD: 1.10%
• 6M: 1.36%
• 1Y: 3.92%
• 3Y*: 3.67%
• 5Y*: 1.90%
• 10Y*: 1.82%

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

PGRO vs. SMMU - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
PGRO Putnam Focused Large Cap Growth ETF	9.11%	15.13%	34.01%	45.19%	-31.53%	16.67%
SMMU PIMCO Short Term Municipal Bond Active ETF	1.10%	4.06%	2.68%	4.39%	-2.45%	-0.06%

Correlation

The correlation between PGRO and SMMU is 0.11, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.11
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.14
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.12
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 27, 2021	0.12

Return for Risk

PGRO vs. SMMU — Risk / Return Rank

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

PGRO

PGRO Risk / Return Rank: 39
PGRO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 45
PGRO Sortino Ratio Rank: 44
PGRO Omega Ratio Rank: 43
PGRO Calmar Ratio Rank: 32
PGRO Martin Ratio Rank: 34

SMMU

SMMU Risk / Return Rank: 92
SMMU Sharpe Ratio Rank: 95
SMMU Sortino Ratio Rank: 96
SMMU Omega Ratio Rank: 97
SMMU Calmar Ratio Rank: 88
SMMU Martin Ratio Rank: 86

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.

PGRO vs. SMMU - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Putnam Focused Large Cap Growth ETF (PGRO) and PIMCO Short Term Municipal Bond Active ETF (SMMU). 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.

	PGRO	SMMU	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	1.58	3.84	-2.26
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	2.20	5.82	-3.62
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.28	1.90	-0.63
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.56	5.10	-3.55
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	5.12	18.24	-13.12
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

PGRO vs. SMMU - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current PGRO Sharpe Ratio is 1.58, which is lower than the SMMU Sharpe Ratio of 3.84. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of PGRO and SMMU, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	PGRO	SMMU	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.58	3.84	-2.26
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.65	1.14	-0.49
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	0.67	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.66	0.60	+0.05

Drawdowns

PGRO vs. SMMU - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PGRO drawdown since its inception was -34.73%, which is greater than SMMU's maximum drawdown of -5.09%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PGRO and SMMU.

Drawdown Indicators

	PGRO	SMMU	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-34.73%	-5.09%	-29.64%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-16.34%	-0.77%	-15.57%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-23.31%	-1.95%	-21.36%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-34.73%	-4.76%	-29.97%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-5.09%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.07%	-0.03%	-1.04%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-10.27%	-0.55%	-9.72%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.96%	0.22%	+4.74%

Volatility

PGRO vs. SMMU - Volatility Comparison

Putnam Focused Large Cap Growth ETF (PGRO) has a higher volatility of 4.05% compared to PIMCO Short Term Municipal Bond Active ETF (SMMU) at 0.31%. This indicates that PGRO's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than SMMU based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	PGRO	SMMU	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.05%	0.31%	+3.74%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	12.28%	0.79%	+11.49%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	16.10%	1.02%	+15.08%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	21.81%	1.67%	+20.14%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	21.77%	2.73%	+19.04%

PGRO vs. SMMU - Expense Ratio Comparison

PGRO has a 0.55% expense ratio, which is higher than SMMU's 0.35% expense ratio.

Dividends

PGRO vs. SMMU - Dividend Comparison

PGRO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.02%, less than SMMU's 2.84% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
PGRO Putnam Focused Large Cap Growth ETF	0.02%	0.02%	0.08%	0.19%	0.12%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
SMMU PIMCO Short Term Municipal Bond Active ETF	2.84%	2.80%	3.03%	2.79%	1.37%	0.60%	1.19%	1.82%	1.57%	1.41%	1.03%	0.89%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both PGRO and SMMU in my portfolio?

PGRO and SMMU have a correlation of 0.11, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, PGRO or SMMU?

PGRO has higher volatility (4.05%) compared to SMMU (0.31%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PGRO dropped -34.73% vs SMMU's -5.09%.

Which ETF is better, PGRO or SMMU?

On 5-year performance, PGRO leads with 14.11% vs 1.90% for SMMU. On fees, SMMU is cheaper at 0.35% per year. On volatility, SMMU has been the lower-risk option at 0.31%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, PGRO or SMMU?

Over the 5-year period, PGRO has performed better with a 14.11% return vs 1.90%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, PGRO or SMMU?

SMMU is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.55% for PGRO.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, PGRO or SMMU?

SMMU has the higher dividend yield at 2.84%, compared with 0.02% for PGRO.

What is the main difference between PGRO and SMMU?

PGRO is categorized as Large Cap Growth Equities, while SMMU is Municipal Bonds. They also come from different issuers: Power Corporation of Canada and PIMCO. Their fees differ too: 0.55% for PGRO and 0.35% for SMMU.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

SMMU currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.84 vs 1.58), 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.