PJFG vs. FFLG

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

PJFG (PGIM Jennison Focused Growth ETF) and FFLG (Fidelity Fundamental Large Cap Growth ETF) are both Large Cap Growth Equities funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past 3 years, PJFG returned 24.11%/yr vs 29.35%/yr for FFLG. Their correlation of 0.94 suggests significant overlap in exposure. PJFG charges 0.75%/yr vs 0.38%/yr for FFLG.

Performance

PJFG vs. FFLG - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in PGIM Jennison Focused Growth ETF (PJFG) and Fidelity Fundamental Large Cap Growth ETF (FFLG). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, PJFG achieves a 6.93% return, which is significantly lower than FFLG's 17.03% return.

PJFG

• 1D: 0.27%
• 1M: 6.68%
• YTD: 6.93%
• 6M: 5.99%
• 1Y: 19.48%
• 3Y*: 24.11%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

FFLG

• 1D: 0.46%
• 1M: 6.72%
• YTD: 17.03%
• 6M: 16.08%
• 1Y: 38.91%
• 3Y*: 29.35%
• 5Y*: 12.69%
• 10Y*: —

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

PJFG vs. FFLG - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
PJFG PGIM Jennison Focused Growth ETF	6.93%	16.94%	31.59%	54.23%	-6.69%
FFLG Fidelity Fundamental Large Cap Growth ETF	17.03%	19.61%	32.29%	49.71%	-4.93%

Correlation

The correlation between PJFG and FFLG is 0.93, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.93
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.94
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 15, 2022	0.94

The correlation between PJFG and FFLG has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.93 to 0.94 - a consistent structural relationship.

PJFG vs. FFLG - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	PJFG	FFLG
Technology	48.4%	51.7%
Communication Services	20.2%	15.1%
Consumer Cyclical	12.6%	11.3%
Healthcare	6.0%	6.4%
Industrials	4.9%	5.9%
Financial Services	3.4%	3.3%
Consumer Defensive	3.0%	0.6%
Utilities	1.6%	1.4%
Basic Materials	-	1.4%
Energy	-	0.3%
Real Estate	-	0.7%

Return for Risk

PJFG vs. FFLG — Risk / Return Rank

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

PJFG

PJFG Risk / Return Rank: 29
PJFG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 33
PJFG Sortino Ratio Rank: 32
PJFG Omega Ratio Rank: 32
PJFG Calmar Ratio Rank: 23
PJFG Martin Ratio Rank: 25

FFLG

FFLG Risk / Return Rank: 61
FFLG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 66
FFLG Sortino Ratio Rank: 61
FFLG Omega Ratio Rank: 61
FFLG Calmar Ratio Rank: 57
FFLG Martin Ratio Rank: 61

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.

PJFG vs. FFLG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for PGIM Jennison Focused Growth ETF (PJFG) and Fidelity Fundamental Large Cap Growth ETF (FFLG). 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.

	PJFG	FFLG	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.16	2.14	-0.98
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.66	2.82	-1.16
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.21	1.37	-0.16
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.03	2.75	-1.72
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	3.23	10.74	-7.51
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

PJFG vs. FFLG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current PJFG Sharpe Ratio is 1.16, which is lower than the FFLG Sharpe Ratio of 2.14. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of PJFG and FFLG, 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

	PJFG	FFLG	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.16	2.14	-0.98
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.50	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.36	0.44	+0.92

Drawdowns

PJFG vs. FFLG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PJFG drawdown since its inception was -24.24%, smaller than the maximum FFLG drawdown of -44.52%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PJFG and FFLG.

Drawdown Indicators

	PJFG	FFLG	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-24.24%	-44.52%	+20.28%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-19.00%	-14.23%	-4.77%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-24.24%	-26.72%	+2.48%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-44.52%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.90%	-0.44%	-1.46%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.74%	-14.26%	+10.52%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	6.04%	3.63%	+2.41%

Volatility

PJFG vs. FFLG - Volatility Comparison

PGIM Jennison Focused Growth ETF (PJFG) and Fidelity Fundamental Large Cap Growth ETF (FFLG) have volatilities of 4.37% and 4.54%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	PJFG	FFLG	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.37%	4.54%	-0.17%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	12.87%	14.11%	-1.24%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	16.82%	18.28%	-1.46%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	20.86%	25.33%	-4.47%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	20.86%	25.38%	-4.52%

PJFG vs. FFLG - Expense Ratio Comparison

PJFG has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is higher than FFLG's 0.38% expense ratio.

Dividends

PJFG vs. FFLG - Dividend Comparison

PJFG has not paid dividends to shareholders, while FFLG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.13%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
FFLG Fidelity Fundamental Large Cap Growth ETF	0.13%	0.14%	0.09%	0.00%	1.50%	0.55%
PJFG PGIM Jennison Focused Growth ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both PJFG and FFLG in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.93, PJFG and FFLG move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

Which is riskier, PJFG or FFLG?

FFLG has higher volatility (4.54%) compared to PJFG (4.37%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PJFG dropped -24.24% vs FFLG's -44.52%.

Which ETF is better, PJFG or FFLG?

On 3-year performance, FFLG leads with 29.35% vs 24.11% for PJFG. On fees, FFLG is cheaper at 0.38% per year. On volatility, PJFG has been the lower-risk option at 4.37%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, PJFG or FFLG?

Over the 3-year period, FFLG has performed better with a 29.35% return vs 24.11%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, PJFG or FFLG?

FFLG is cheaper with a 0.38% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for PJFG.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, PJFG or FFLG?

FFLG has the higher dividend yield at 0.13%, compared with 0.00% for PJFG.

What is the main difference between PJFG and FFLG?

They also come from different issuers: PGIM and Fidelity. Their fees differ too: 0.75% for PJFG and 0.38% for FFLG.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FFLG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.14 vs 1.16), 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.