PWB vs. ATFV
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 18.57%/yr vs 16.27%/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
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, PWB achieves a 28.40% return, which is significantly higher than ATFV's 18.84% return.
PWB
- 1D
- 0.50%
- 1M
- 10.85%
- YTD
- 28.40%
- 6M
- 28.76%
- 1Y
- 46.56%
- 3Y*
- 34.40%
- 5Y*
- 18.57%
- 10Y*
- 18.44%
ATFV
- 1D
- -0.73%
- 1M
- 11.67%
- YTD
- 18.84%
- 6M
- 18.21%
- 1Y
- 52.70%
- 3Y*
- 40.20%
- 5Y*
- 16.27%
- 10Y*
- —
PWB vs. ATFV - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
PWB Invesco Dynamic Large Cap Growth ETF | 28.40% | 24.94% | 31.04% | 30.61% | -25.81% | 15.93% |
ATFV Alger 35 ETF | 18.84% | 38.20% | 46.14% | 32.75% | -35.97% | 4.19% |
Correlation
The correlation between PWB and ATFV is 0.84, 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 | 0.84 |
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 5, 2021 | 0.86 |
The correlation between PWB and ATFV has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.83 to 0.86 - a consistent structural relationship.
PWB vs. ATFV - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
PWB
ATFV
Technology
Industrials
Communication Services
Financial Services
Consumer Defensive
-
Consumer Cyclical
Healthcare
Utilities
Basic Materials
-
Energy
-
-
Real Estate
-
-
Technology
PWB
ATFV
Industrials
PWB
ATFV
Communication Services
PWB
ATFV
Financial Services
PWB
ATFV
Consumer Defensive
PWB
ATFV
-
Consumer Cyclical
PWB
ATFV
Healthcare
PWB
ATFV
Utilities
PWB
ATFV
Basic Materials
PWB
ATFV
-
Energy
PWB
-
ATFV
-
Real Estate
PWB
-
ATFV
-
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
Return for Risk
PWB vs. ATFV — Risk / Return Rank
PWB
ATFV
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.
| PWB | ATFV | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | 2.53 | 2.31 | +0.22 |
Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | 3.27 | 2.99 | +0.28 |
Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.42 | 1.38 | +0.05 |
Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.95 | 2.99 | +0.96 |
Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 17.10 | 10.28 | +6.82 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| PWB | ATFV | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.53 | 2.31 | +0.22 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.89 | 0.62 | +0.27 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.89 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.61 | 0.61 | 0.00 |
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.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| PWB | ATFV | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest 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 DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | 0.00% | -0.73% | +0.73% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -8.24% | -17.82% | +9.58% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.80% | 5.33% | -2.53% |
Volatility
PWB vs. ATFV - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Invesco Dynamic Large Cap Growth ETF (PWB) is 5.39%, while Alger 35 ETF (ATFV) has a volatility of 7.24%. This indicates that PWB experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than ATFV based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| PWB | ATFV | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 5.39% | 7.24% | -1.85% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 15.03% | 17.21% | -2.18% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 18.48% | 22.92% | -4.44% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 21.00% | 26.60% | -5.60% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 20.71% | 26.54% | -5.83% |
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 0.17%.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ATFV Alger 35 ETF | 0.17% | 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
PWB and ATFV have a correlation of 0.84, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
ATFV has higher volatility (7.24%) compared to PWB (5.39%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PWB dropped -52.58% vs ATFV's -45.34%.
On 5-year performance, PWB leads with 18.57% vs 16.27% for ATFV. On fees, ATFV is cheaper at 0.55% per year. On volatility, PWB has been the lower-risk option at 5.39%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 5-year period, PWB has performed better with a 18.57% return vs 16.27%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
ATFV is cheaper with a 0.55% expense ratio, compared with 0.56% for PWB.
ATFV has the higher dividend yield at 0.17%, compared with 0.00% for PWB.
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.
PWB currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.53 vs 2.31), 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.
Find the right allocation for PWB and ATFV
Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.
Open Portfolio Optimizer