AEMG vs PFUT
Harbor AlphaEdge Mid Cap Growth ETF vs Putnam Sustainable Future ETF
Which is better, AEMG or PFUT?
AEMG costs less.
AEMG has a lower expense ratio. AEMG is less concentrated, with 27.8% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 28.3%.
MarketXLS is not an investment adviser. This comparison is generated automatically from market data and is for information only. A Best mark means the better reading on that one measure, not a recommendation to buy.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | AEMG | PFUT |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.38%Best | 0.64% |
| AUM | $2M | $4M |
| Dividend Yield | 0.00% | 0.00% |
| Holdings | 115 | 72 |
| Volatility (annualized) | - | 20.0% |
| Max Drawdown | - | -44.9% |
| Top 10 Weight | 27.8%Best | 28.3% |
| Fund Family | Harbor Funds | Putnam Investments |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Mid Cap Growth | Mid Cap Growth |
| Inception | Aug 26, 2026 | May 25, 2021 |
Not shown on this pair: YTD Return, 1Y Return, 3Y Return (annualized), 5Y Return (annualized), $10,000 over the window.
The two price series end 127 days apart, so a return over any period would be measuring two different stretches of market. Those rows are withheld. AEMG has data through Oct 14, 2026 and PFUT through Jun 9, 2026.
Fees and Cost Over Time
AEMG charges 0.38% per year while PFUT charges 0.64%. On a $10,000 position that is $38 vs $64 annually, a gap of $26 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, AEMG currently yields 0.00% against 0.00% for PFUT.
Holdings Overlap
13.5% of AEMG's money is in holdings PFUT also owns. 19.1% of PFUT's money is in holdings AEMG also owns.
PFUT and AEMG share little of their money.
The two holdings books were reported 218 days apart, AEMG as of Oct 3, 2026 and PFUT as of Feb 27, 2026, so some of the difference between them is the time between the two reports rather than the funds.
13 positions in common, counted across the 126 positions we hold weights for in AEMG and 68 in PFUT, against full books of 115 and 72.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 49 positions for PFUT that do not appear in our book for AEMG (69.3% of the fund), and 104 for AEMG that do not appear in PFUT (80.3%).
Some of those will be the same company recorded under a different code in one of the two books, so the real difference in what you would own is no larger than this and may be smaller. We do not name the individual positions here for that reason.
Top Shared Holdings
| Stock | Weight in AEMG | Weight in PFUT | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| DDOGDatadog Inc | 2.59% | 2.16% | 0.43% |
| DXCMDexcom Inc. | 1.97% | 2.37% | 0.40% |
| SNOWSnowflake Inc | 3.31% | 0.72% | 2.59% |
| RCLRoyal Caribbean Cruises Ltd Common Stock | 0.32% | 3.18% | 2.86% |
| VSTVistra Energy Corp. | 0.92% | 2.55% | 1.63% |
| PSTGPure Storage Inc | 1.77% | 1.38% | 0.39% |
| ALNYAlnylam Pharmaceuticals Inc. | 0.32% | 1.83% | 1.51% |
| SNSharkninja Inc | 0.25% | 1.33% | 1.08% |
| RBLXRoblox Corp., Class A | 0.85% | 0.62% | 0.23% |
| URIUnited Rentals Inc Sedol 2134781 | 0.43% | 0.99% | 0.56% |
You are not choosing between two funds in isolation.
Whichever of AEMG and PFUT you pick has to sit alongside everything else you own. Add the rest and see what the combination actually holds.
Free for up to 10 holdings. No account needed.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, AEMG or PFUT?
AEMG has an expense ratio of 0.38% while PFUT charges 0.64%. AEMG is the cheaper option, by $26 a year on a $10,000 investment.
What is the holdings overlap between AEMG and PFUT?
19.1% of PFUT's money is in holdings AEMG also owns. 19.1% of PFUT's is in holdings AEMG also owns. They hold 13 positions in common, counted across the 126 positions we hold weights for in AEMG and 68 in PFUT.
Which pays a higher dividend, AEMG or PFUT?
AEMG yields 0.00% while PFUT yields 0.00%, so PFUT currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is PFUT better than AEMG?
AEMG has a lower expense ratio. AEMG is less concentrated, with 27.8% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 28.3%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.