AFLG vs PWRD
First Trust Active Factor Large Cap ETF vs TCW Transform Systems ETF
Which is better, AFLG or PWRD?
Each has led over a different period.
AFLG has a lower expense ratio. AFLG led over 1Y, PWRD over 3Y and the full window. AFLG is less concentrated, with 33.0% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 50.6%.
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 | AFLG | PWRD |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.55%Best | 0.75% |
| AUM | $803M | $1.5B |
| Dividend Yield | 0.71% | 0.06% |
| Holdings | 435 | 56 |
| YTD Return | +14.82%Best | +3.29% |
| 1Y Return | +17.70%Best | +2.06% |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +22.47% | +25.66%Best |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +12.74% | - |
| Volatility (annualized) | 15.0%Best | 23.2% |
| Max Drawdown | -20.9%Best | -25.9% |
| $10,000 over 4.7 years | $17,902 | $21,348Best |
| Top 10 Weight | 33.0%Best | 50.6% |
| Fund Family | First Trust Portfolios (US) | TCW ETFs |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Blend | Large Cap Blend |
| Inception | Dec 4, 2019 | Feb 2, 2022 |
Volatility and max drawdown, and the $10,000 over 4.7 years row, are measured over the window both funds cover: Feb 3, 2022 to Oct 14, 2026 (4.7 years).
AFLG vs PWRD growth
Month-end closes. Both lines start at 0% in the first month shown, so the gap between them is the difference in growth across that window. The full view covers the 4.7 years both funds cover.
AFLG vs PWRD Performance
First Trust Active Factor Large Cap ETF (AFLG) is an ETF from First Trust Portfolios (US) and TCW Transform Systems ETF (PWRD) is an ETF from TCW ETFs. Over the past year AFLG returned +17.70% while PWRD returned +2.06%. Year to date, AFLG is up 14.82% versus a gain of 3.29% for PWRD.
Over three years, AFLG compounded at +22.47% per year against +25.66% for PWRD.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
PWRD has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 23.2% compared with 15.0% for AFLG. Lower volatility generally means a smoother ride, though it often comes with lower long-run returns.
The deepest peak-to-trough decline in our data was -20.9% for AFLG and -25.9% for PWRD. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.80. They usually move together, but the gap leaves some room for diversification.
Fees and Cost Over Time
AFLG charges 0.55% per year while PWRD charges 0.75%. On a $10,000 position that is $55 vs $75 annually, a gap of $20 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, AFLG currently yields 0.71% against 0.06% for PWRD.
Holdings Overlap
5.7% of AFLG's money is in holdings PWRD also owns. 27.4% of PWRD's money is in holdings AFLG also owns.
PWRD and AFLG share little of their money.
7 positions in common, counted across the 218 positions we hold weights for in AFLG and 28 in PWRD, against full books of 435 and 56.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 15 positions for PWRD that do not appear in our book for AFLG (54.0% of the fund), and 207 for AFLG that do not appear in PWRD (92.6%).
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 AFLG | Weight in PWRD | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| AVGOBroadcom Inc | 2.50% | 3.79% | 1.29% |
| ANETArista Networks Inc Common Stock | 0.09% | 5.72% | 5.63% |
| KLACKla-tencor | 0.44% | 5.32% | 4.88% |
| AMATApplied Materials, Inc. | 0.75% | 4.88% | 4.13% |
| XOMExxonmobil Corp. | 0.98% | 3.35% | 2.37% |
| FIXComfort Systems USA Inc. | 0.45% | 2.32% | 1.87% |
| CATCaterpillar, Inc. | 0.50% | 1.97% | 1.47% |
27.4% of PWRD is already inside AFLG.
You probably hold more than these two. Add the rest and see how much of the whole book is the same companies twice.
Free for up to 10 holdings. No account needed.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, AFLG or PWRD?
AFLG has an expense ratio of 0.55% while PWRD charges 0.75%. AFLG is the cheaper option, by $20 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, AFLG or PWRD?
Over the past year AFLG returned +17.70% vs +2.06% for PWRD, so AFLG leads on 1-year performance. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, AFLG or PWRD?
PWRD has been the more volatile fund at 23.2% annualized versus 15.0% for AFLG. Worst drawdown: AFLG -20.9% vs PWRD -25.9%.
Should I hold both AFLG and PWRD?
AFLG and PWRD have a monthly-return correlation of 0.80, so their returns are far enough apart for the mix to behave differently from either one alone. This is information, not a recommendation.
What is the holdings overlap between AFLG and PWRD?
27.4% of PWRD's money is in holdings AFLG also owns. 27.4% of PWRD's is in holdings AFLG also owns. They hold 7 positions in common, counted across the 218 positions we hold weights for in AFLG and 28 in PWRD.
Which pays a higher dividend, AFLG or PWRD?
AFLG yields 0.71% while PWRD yields 0.06%, so AFLG currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is PWRD better than AFLG?
AFLG has a lower expense ratio. AFLG led over 1Y, PWRD over 3Y and the full window. AFLG is less concentrated, with 33.0% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 50.6%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.