QGRPX vs. PCLCX

Last updated Jun 26, 2026

QGRPX (UBS US Quality Growth At Reasonable Price Fund) and PCLCX (PACE Large Co Growth Equity Investments) are both Large Cap Growth Equities funds from UBS. Over the past 5 years, QGRPX returned 10.16%/yr vs 8.31%/yr for PCLCX. With a 0.95 correlation, they move nearly in lockstep. QGRPX charges 0.50%/yr vs 0.88%/yr for PCLCX.

Performance

QGRPX vs. PCLCX - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in UBS US Quality Growth At Reasonable Price Fund (QGRPX) and PACE Large Co Growth Equity Investments (PCLCX). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, QGRPX achieves a -1.98% return, which is significantly lower than PCLCX's 0.49% return.

QGRPX

• 1D: -0.11%
• 1M: -4.18%
• YTD: -1.98%
• 6M: -2.86%
• 1Y: 7.37%
• 3Y*: 17.59%
• 5Y*: 10.16%
• 10Y*: —

PCLCX

• 1D: -0.06%
• 1M: -2.07%
• YTD: 0.49%
• 6M: -1.02%
• 1Y: 7.94%
• 3Y*: 16.44%
• 5Y*: 8.31%
• 10Y*: 14.93%

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

QGRPX vs. PCLCX - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
QGRPX UBS US Quality Growth At Reasonable Price Fund	-1.98%	15.51%	25.13%	35.52%	-25.57%	29.14%	14.62%
PCLCX PACE Large Co Growth Equity Investments	0.49%	9.86%	28.05%	35.17%	-28.18%	20.18%	20.67%

Correlation

The correlation between QGRPX and PCLCX 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	0.95
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.96
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 9, 2020	0.95

The correlation between QGRPX and PCLCX has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.93 to 0.96 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

QGRPX vs. PCLCX — Risk / Return Rank

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

QGRPX

QGRPX Risk / Return Rank: 8
QGRPX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9
QGRPX Sortino Ratio Rank: 9
QGRPX Omega Ratio Rank: 9
QGRPX Calmar Ratio Rank: 7
QGRPX Martin Ratio Rank: 8

PCLCX

PCLCX Risk / Return Rank: 8
PCLCX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9
PCLCX Sortino Ratio Rank: 9
PCLCX Omega Ratio Rank: 9
PCLCX Calmar Ratio Rank: 7
PCLCX Martin Ratio Rank: 7

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.

QGRPX vs. PCLCX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for UBS US Quality Growth At Reasonable Price Fund (QGRPX) and PACE Large Co Growth Equity Investments (PCLCX). 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.

	QGRPX	PCLCX	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.55	0.54	+0.01
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.87	0.84	+0.03
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.11	1.11	0.00
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.48	0.48	0.00
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	1.50	1.38	+0.13

QGRPX vs. PCLCX - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current QGRPX Sharpe Ratio is 0.55, which is comparable to the PCLCX Sharpe Ratio of 0.54. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of QGRPX and PCLCX, 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

QGRPX vs. PCLCX - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QGRPX drawdown since its inception was -30.28%, smaller than the maximum PCLCX drawdown of -63.98%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QGRPX and PCLCX.

Drawdown Indicators

	QGRPX	PCLCX	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-30.28%	-63.98%	+33.70%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-17.45%	-17.06%	-0.39%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-21.03%	-21.26%	+0.23%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-30.28%	-38.81%	+8.53%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-38.81%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-6.42%	-4.32%	-2.10%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-7.53%	-20.31%	+12.78%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	5.40%	5.79%	-0.39%

Volatility

QGRPX vs. PCLCX - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for UBS US Quality Growth At Reasonable Price Fund (QGRPX) is 5.65%, while PACE Large Co Growth Equity Investments (PCLCX) has a volatility of 6.63%. This indicates that QGRPX experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than PCLCX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	QGRPX	PCLCX	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.65%	6.63%	-0.98%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	12.44%	12.33%	+0.11%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	15.32%	15.32%	0.00%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	19.73%	37.03%	-17.30%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	19.32%	31.02%	-11.70%

QGRPX vs. PCLCX - Expense Ratio Comparison

QGRPX has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is lower than PCLCX's 0.88% expense ratio.

Dividends

QGRPX vs. PCLCX - Dividend Comparison

QGRPX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 6.29%, less than PCLCX's 20.56% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
PCLCX PACE Large Co Growth Equity Investments	20.56%	20.66%	11.94%	2.09%	60.17%	22.81%	18.38%	16.53%	22.05%	10.32%	3.30%	17.60%
QGRPX UBS US Quality Growth At Reasonable Price Fund	6.29%	6.16%	3.62%	0.42%	1.00%	2.84%	0.37%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both QGRPX and PCLCX in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.93, QGRPX and PCLCX 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, QGRPX or PCLCX?

PCLCX has higher volatility (6.63%) compared to QGRPX (5.65%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QGRPX dropped -30.28% vs PCLCX's -63.98%.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

QGRPX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.55 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.