PPLT vs. AFSC

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

PPLT (abrdn Physical Platinum Shares ETF) and AFSC (abrdn Focused U.S. Small Cap Active ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - PPLT is a Precious Metals fund tracking the LBMA Platinum Price PM, while AFSC is a Small Cap Blend Equities fund actively managed by Aberdeen. PPLT is passively managed, while AFSC is actively managed. Over the past year, PPLT returned 27.10% vs 34.76% for AFSC. At a 0.20 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. PPLT charges 0.60%/yr vs 0.65%/yr for AFSC.

Performance

PPLT vs. AFSC - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in abrdn Physical Platinum Shares ETF (PPLT) and abrdn Focused U.S. Small Cap Active ETF (AFSC). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, PPLT achieves a -19.76% return, which is significantly lower than AFSC's 24.40% return.

PPLT

• 1D: -1.45%
• 1M: -14.37%
• YTD: -19.76%
• 6M: -28.09%
• 1Y: 27.10%
• 3Y*: 20.79%
• 5Y*: 7.90%
• 10Y*: 4.70%

AFSC

• 1D: -1.29%
• 1M: 6.74%
• YTD: 24.40%
• 6M: 19.46%
• 1Y: 34.76%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

PPLT vs. AFSC - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
PPLT abrdn Physical Platinum Shares ETF	-19.76%	108.05%
AFSC abrdn Focused U.S. Small Cap Active ETF	24.40%	2.33%

Correlation

The correlation between PPLT and AFSC is 0.22, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.22
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 18, 2025	0.20

Return for Risk

PPLT vs. AFSC — Risk / Return Rank

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

PPLT

PPLT Risk / Return Rank: 18
PPLT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 17
PPLT Sortino Ratio Rank: 18
PPLT Omega Ratio Rank: 20
PPLT Calmar Ratio Rank: 17
PPLT Martin Ratio Rank: 16

AFSC

AFSC Risk / Return Rank: 65
AFSC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 61
AFSC Sortino Ratio Rank: 61
AFSC Omega Ratio Rank: 53
AFSC Calmar Ratio Rank: 73
AFSC Martin Ratio Rank: 75

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.

PPLT vs. AFSC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for abrdn Physical Platinum Shares ETF (PPLT) and abrdn Focused U.S. Small Cap Active ETF (AFSC). 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.

	PPLT	AFSC	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.54	1.84	-1.30
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.99	2.60	-1.61
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.14	1.31	-0.17
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.67	3.40	-2.73
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	1.48	12.89	-11.41

PPLT vs. AFSC - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current PPLT Sharpe Ratio is 0.54, which is lower than the AFSC Sharpe Ratio of 1.84. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of PPLT and AFSC, 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

PPLT vs. AFSC - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PPLT drawdown since its inception was -70.73%, which is greater than AFSC's maximum drawdown of -21.93%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PPLT and AFSC.

Drawdown Indicators

	PPLT	AFSC	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-70.73%	-21.93%	-48.80%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-40.69%	-10.29%	-30.40%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-40.69%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-40.69%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-51.14%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-40.69%	-1.29%	-39.40%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-39.93%	-4.12%	-35.81%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	18.34%	2.70%	+15.64%

Volatility

PPLT vs. AFSC - Volatility Comparison

abrdn Physical Platinum Shares ETF (PPLT) has a higher volatility of 11.41% compared to abrdn Focused U.S. Small Cap Active ETF (AFSC) at 5.46%. This indicates that PPLT's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than AFSC based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	PPLT	AFSC	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	11.41%	5.46%	+5.95%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	45.28%	14.59%	+30.69%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	50.70%	19.01%	+31.69%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	32.68%	22.51%	+10.17%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	29.18%	22.51%	+6.67%

PPLT vs. AFSC - Expense Ratio Comparison

PPLT has a 0.60% expense ratio, which is lower than AFSC's 0.65% expense ratio.

Dividends

PPLT vs. AFSC - Dividend Comparison

PPLT has not paid dividends to shareholders, while AFSC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.06%.

Position	TTM	2025
AFSC abrdn Focused U.S. Small Cap Active ETF	0.06%	0.08%
PPLT abrdn Physical Platinum Shares ETF	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both PPLT and AFSC in my portfolio?

PPLT and AFSC have a correlation of 0.22, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, PPLT or AFSC?

PPLT has higher volatility (11.41%) compared to AFSC (5.46%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PPLT dropped -70.73% vs AFSC's -21.93%.

Which ETF is better, PPLT or AFSC?

On 1-year performance, AFSC leads with 34.76% vs 27.10% for PPLT. On fees, PPLT is cheaper at 0.60% per year. On volatility, AFSC has been the lower-risk option at 5.46%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, PPLT or AFSC?

Over the 1-year period, AFSC has performed better with a 34.76% return vs 27.10%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, PPLT or AFSC?

PPLT is cheaper with a 0.60% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for AFSC.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, PPLT or AFSC?

AFSC has the higher dividend yield at 0.06%, compared with 0.00% for PPLT.

What is the main difference between PPLT and AFSC?

PPLT is categorized as Precious Metals, while AFSC is Small Cap Blend Equities. They also come from different issuers: abrdn and Aberdeen. Their fees differ too: 0.60% for PPLT and 0.65% for AFSC.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

AFSC currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.84 vs 0.54), 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.