PWB vs. ATFV

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

PWB (Invesco Dynamic Large Cap Growth ETF) and ATFV (Alger 35 ETF) are both Large Cap Growth Equities funds - PWB tracks the Dynamic Large Cap Growth Intellidex Index while ATFV tracks the S&P 500. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, PWB returned 17.17%/yr vs 13.59%/yr for ATFV. Their correlation of 0.86 suggests significant overlap in exposure. PWB charges 0.56%/yr vs 0.55%/yr for ATFV.

Performance

PWB vs. ATFV - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Invesco Dynamic Large Cap Growth ETF (PWB) and Alger 35 ETF (ATFV). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, PWB achieves a 26.79% return, which is significantly higher than ATFV's 14.32% return.

PWB

• 1D: -4.36%
• 1M: 4.17%
• YTD: 26.79%
• 6M: 24.81%
• 1Y: 42.75%
• 3Y*: 32.92%
• 5Y*: 17.17%
• 10Y*: 18.61%

ATFV

• 1D: -2.39%
• 1M: 1.71%
• YTD: 14.32%
• 6M: 12.11%
• 1Y: 42.99%
• 3Y*: 37.40%
• 5Y*: 13.59%
• 10Y*: —

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

PWB vs. ATFV - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
PWB Invesco Dynamic Large Cap Growth ETF	26.79%	24.94%	31.04%	30.61%	-25.81%	14.24%
ATFV Alger 35 ETF	14.32%	38.20%	46.14%	32.75%	-35.97%	3.03%

Correlation

The correlation between PWB and ATFV is 0.82, 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	0.82
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.83
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.86
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 4, 2021	0.86

The correlation between PWB and ATFV has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.82 to 0.86 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

PWB vs. ATFV — Risk / Return Rank

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

PWB

PWB Risk / Return Rank: 68
PWB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 68
PWB Sortino Ratio Rank: 60
PWB Omega Ratio Rank: 62
PWB Calmar Ratio Rank: 73
PWB Martin Ratio Rank: 79

ATFV

ATFV Risk / Return Rank: 50
ATFV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 54
ATFV Sortino Ratio Rank: 50
ATFV Omega Ratio Rank: 48
ATFV Calmar Ratio Rank: 50
ATFV Martin Ratio Rank: 49

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.

PWB vs. ATFV - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco Dynamic Large Cap Growth ETF (PWB) and Alger 35 ETF (ATFV). 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.

	PWB	ATFV	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.08	1.75	+0.33
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.67	2.36	+0.32
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.36	1.29	+0.07
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.55	2.36	+1.19
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	14.75	7.90	+6.85

PWB vs. ATFV - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current PWB Sharpe Ratio is 2.08, which is comparable to the ATFV Sharpe Ratio of 1.75. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of PWB and ATFV, 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

PWB vs. ATFV - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PWB drawdown since its inception was -52.58%, which is greater than ATFV's maximum drawdown of -45.34%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PWB and ATFV.

Drawdown Indicators

	PWB	ATFV	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-52.58%	-45.34%	-7.24%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-12.11%	-18.29%	+6.18%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-22.10%	-29.01%	+6.91%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-31.41%	-45.34%	+13.93%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-32.36%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-4.36%	-4.50%	+0.14%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-8.22%	-17.68%	+9.46%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.91%	5.46%	-2.55%

Volatility

PWB vs. ATFV - Volatility Comparison

Invesco Dynamic Large Cap Growth ETF (PWB) and Alger 35 ETF (ATFV) have volatilities of 10.34% and 10.85%, 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

	PWB	ATFV	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	10.34%	10.85%	-0.51%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	17.43%	19.23%	-1.80%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	20.72%	24.74%	-4.02%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	21.41%	26.92%	-5.51%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	20.91%	26.73%	-5.82%

PWB vs. ATFV - Expense Ratio Comparison

PWB has a 0.56% expense ratio, which is higher than ATFV's 0.55% expense ratio.

Dividends

PWB vs. ATFV - Dividend Comparison

PWB has not paid dividends to shareholders, while ATFV's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.18%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
ATFV Alger 35 ETF	0.18%	0.20%	0.16%	0.01%	0.06%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
PWB Invesco Dynamic Large Cap Growth ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.08%	0.37%	0.31%	0.04%	0.21%	0.58%	0.97%	0.54%	0.82%	0.67%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both PWB and ATFV in my portfolio?

PWB and ATFV have a correlation of 0.82, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, PWB or ATFV?

ATFV has higher volatility (10.85%) compared to PWB (10.34%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PWB dropped -52.58% vs ATFV's -45.34%.

Which ETF is better, PWB or ATFV?

On 5-year performance, PWB leads with 17.17% vs 13.59% for ATFV. On fees, ATFV is cheaper at 0.55% per year. On volatility, PWB has been the lower-risk option at 10.34%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, PWB or ATFV?

Over the 5-year period, PWB has performed better with a 17.17% return vs 13.59%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, PWB or ATFV?

ATFV is cheaper with a 0.55% expense ratio, compared with 0.56% for PWB.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, PWB or ATFV?

ATFV has the higher dividend yield at 0.18%, compared with 0.00% for PWB.

What is the main difference between PWB and ATFV?

PWB tracks Dynamic Large Cap Growth Intellidex Index, while ATFV tracks S&P 500. They also come from different issuers: Invesco and Alger Group Holdings LLC. Their fees differ too: 0.56% for PWB and 0.55% for ATFV.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

PWB currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.08 vs 1.75), 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.