VMOT vs. PCGG

Last updated Jul 17, 2026

VMOT (Alpha Architect Value Momentum Trend ETF) and PCGG (Polen Capital Global Growth ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - VMOT is a Momentum fund tracking the Alpha Architect Value Momentum Trend Index, while PCGG is a Global Equities fund actively managed by Polen. VMOT is passively managed, while PCGG is actively managed. Over the past year, VMOT returned 27.84% vs -7.62% for PCGG. A 0.63 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. VMOT charges 1.75%/yr vs 0.85%/yr for PCGG.

Performance

VMOT vs. PCGG - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Alpha Architect Value Momentum Trend ETF (VMOT) and Polen Capital Global Growth ETF (PCGG). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, VMOT achieves a 12.83% return, which is significantly higher than PCGG's -7.38% return.

VMOT

• 1D: -0.91%
• 1M: -2.89%
• 6M: 6.19%
• YTD: 12.83%
• 1Y: 27.84%
• 3Y*: 16.28%
• 5Y*: 6.90%
• 10Y*: —

PCGG

• 1D: -0.79%
• 1M: 0.92%
• 6M: -6.52%
• YTD: -7.38%
• 1Y: -7.62%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

VMOT vs. PCGG - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
VMOT Alpha Architect Value Momentum Trend ETF	12.83%	18.54%	12.07%	5.46%
PCGG Polen Capital Global Growth ETF	-7.38%	1.62%	12.40%	4.17%

Correlation

The correlation between VMOT and PCGG is 0.58, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.58
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 30, 2023	0.63

The correlation between VMOT and PCGG has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.58 to 0.63 - a consistent structural relationship.

VMOT vs. PCGG - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	VMOT	PCGG
Industrials	19.9%	7.3%
Consumer Cyclical	18.8%	7.8%
Technology	11.4%	32.7%
Energy	8.6%	-
Consumer Defensive	8.5%	2.3%
Healthcare	8.4%	7.1%
Financial Services	8.1%	14.4%
Communication Services	7.3%	10.7%
Basic Materials	5.1%	2.2%
Utilities	3.3%	2.0%
Real Estate	0.6%	1.2%

Return for Risk

VMOT vs. PCGG — Risk / Return Rank

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

VMOT

VMOT Risk / Return Rank: 68
VMOT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 67
VMOT Sortino Ratio Rank: 68
VMOT Omega Ratio Rank: 68
VMOT Calmar Ratio Rank: 65
VMOT Martin Ratio Rank: 70

PCGG

PCGG Risk / Return Rank: 6
PCGG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5
PCGG Sortino Ratio Rank: 5
PCGG Omega Ratio Rank: 5
PCGG Calmar Ratio Rank: 6
PCGG Martin Ratio Rank: 6

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.

VMOT vs. PCGG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Alpha Architect Value Momentum Trend ETF (VMOT) and Polen Capital Global Growth ETF (PCGG). 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.

	VMOT	PCGG	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.74	-0.48	+2.22
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.48	-0.56	+3.04
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.32	0.93	+0.39
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.58	-0.34	+2.92
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	10.01	-0.75	+10.76

VMOT vs. PCGG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current VMOT Sharpe Ratio is 1.74, which is higher than the PCGG Sharpe Ratio of -0.48. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of VMOT and PCGG, 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

VMOT vs. PCGG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum VMOT drawdown since its inception was -34.71%, which is greater than PCGG's maximum drawdown of -22.66%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for VMOT and PCGG.

Drawdown Indicators

	VMOT	PCGG	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-34.71%	-22.66%	-12.05%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-10.85%	-22.66%	+11.81%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-20.23%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-23.73%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-4.33%	-12.01%	+7.68%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-13.18%	-5.27%	-7.91%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.79%	10.16%	-7.37%

Volatility

VMOT vs. PCGG - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Alpha Architect Value Momentum Trend ETF (VMOT) is 3.48%, while Polen Capital Global Growth ETF (PCGG) has a volatility of 4.56%. This indicates that VMOT experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than PCGG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	VMOT	PCGG	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.48%	4.56%	-1.08%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	13.77%	13.17%	+0.60%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	16.05%	15.92%	+0.13%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	15.76%	16.71%	-0.95%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	14.93%	16.71%	-1.78%

VMOT vs. PCGG - Expense Ratio Comparison

VMOT has a 1.75% expense ratio, which is higher than PCGG's 0.85% expense ratio.

Dividends

VMOT vs. PCGG - Dividend Comparison

VMOT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.82%, while PCGG has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
PCGG Polen Capital Global Growth ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
VMOT Alpha Architect Value Momentum Trend ETF	1.82%	2.05%	2.54%	4.13%	2.24%	0.82%	0.00%	1.76%	0.93%	0.81%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both VMOT and PCGG in my portfolio?

VMOT and PCGG have a correlation of 0.58, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, VMOT or PCGG?

PCGG has higher volatility (4.56%) compared to VMOT (3.48%). In terms of maximum drawdown, VMOT dropped -34.71% vs PCGG's -22.66%.

Which ETF is better, VMOT or PCGG?

On 1-year performance, VMOT leads with 27.84% vs -7.62% for PCGG. On fees, PCGG is cheaper at 0.85% per year. On volatility, VMOT has been the lower-risk option at 3.48%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, VMOT or PCGG?

Over the 1-year period, VMOT has performed better with a 27.84% return vs -7.62%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, VMOT or PCGG?

PCGG is cheaper with a 0.85% expense ratio, compared with 1.75% for VMOT.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, VMOT or PCGG?

VMOT has the higher dividend yield at 1.82%, compared with 0.00% for PCGG.

What is the main difference between VMOT and PCGG?

VMOT is categorized as Momentum, while PCGG is Global Equities. They also come from different issuers: Alpha Architect and Polen. Their fees differ too: 1.75% for VMOT and 0.85% for PCGG.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

VMOT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.74 vs -0.48), 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.