PGRO vs PJFG
Putnam Focused Large Cap Growth ETF vs PGIM Jennison Focused Growth ETF
Which is better, PGRO or PJFG?
Nearly the same fund. PGRO costs less.
PGRO has a lower expense ratio. PJFG led over 1Y, 3Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.97. PGRO is less concentrated, with 58.8% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 61.0%.
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 | PGRO | PJFG |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.49%Best | 0.75% |
| AUM | $222M | $148M |
| Dividend Yield | 0.02% | 0.00% |
| Holdings | 43 | 78 |
| YTD Return | +7.57% | +8.89%Best |
| 1Y Return | +8.94% | +10.08%Best |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +22.58% | +22.92%Best |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +11.60% | - |
| Volatility (annualized) | 16.5%Best | 18.1% |
| Max Drawdown | -23.3%Best | -24.2% |
| $10,000 over 3.8 years | $22,425 | $23,806Best |
| Top 10 Weight | 58.8%Best | 61.0% |
| Fund Family | Putnam Investments | PGIM Investments |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Growth | Large Cap Growth |
| Inception | May 25, 2021 | Dec 12, 2022 |
Volatility and max drawdown, and the $10,000 over 3.8 years row, are measured over the window both funds cover: Dec 14, 2022 to Oct 14, 2026 (3.8 years).
PGRO vs PJFG 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 3.8 years both funds cover.
PGRO vs PJFG Performance
Putnam Focused Large Cap Growth ETF (PGRO) is an ETF from Putnam Investments and PGIM Jennison Focused Growth ETF (PJFG) is an ETF from PGIM Investments. Over the past year PGRO returned +8.94% while PJFG returned +10.08%. Year to date, PGRO is up 7.57% versus a gain of 8.89% for PJFG.
Over three years, PGRO compounded at +22.58% per year against +22.92% for PJFG. Across the full 4-year window we track, PJFG has the edge at +25.64% annualized vs +23.68%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
PJFG has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 18.1% compared with 16.5% for PGRO. 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 -23.3% for PGRO and -24.2% for PJFG. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.97. They move almost in lockstep, so holding both mostly duplicates the same exposure.
Fees and Cost Over Time
PGRO charges 0.49% per year while PJFG charges 0.75%. On a $10,000 position that is $49 vs $75 annually, a gap of $26 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, PGRO currently yields 0.02% against 0.00% for PJFG.
Holdings Overlap
77.1% of PGRO's money is in holdings PJFG also owns. 77.9% of PJFG's money is in holdings PGRO also owns.
Most of PJFG is already inside PGRO. Owning both mostly buys the same companies twice.
22 positions in common, counted across the 40 positions we hold weights for in PGRO and 37 in PJFG, against full books of 43 and 78.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 13 positions for PJFG that do not appear in our book for PGRO (19.0% of the fund), and 18 for PGRO that do not appear in PJFG (22.9%).
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 PGRO | Weight in PJFG | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| NVDANvidia Corp | 14.08% | 12.21% | 1.87% |
| GOOGLAlphabet Inc | 9.39% | 9.23% | 0.16% |
| AAPLApple, Inc | 6.38% | 6.74% | 0.36% |
| MSFTMicrosoft Corp | 5.06% | 6.42% | 1.36% |
| AVGOBroadcom Inc | 4.75% | 4.72% | 0.03% |
| METAMeta Platforms Inc | 4.68% | 4.17% | 0.51% |
| LLYEli Lilly & Co. | 3.90% | 4.26% | 0.36% |
| AMDAdvanced Micro Devices Inc | 3.36% | 4.52% | 1.16% |
| AMZNAmazon.Com Inc | 2.56% | 5.20% | 2.64% |
| MAMastercard Inc | 2.95% | 3.53% | 0.58% |
77.9% of PJFG is already inside PGRO.
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, PGRO or PJFG?
PGRO has an expense ratio of 0.49% while PJFG charges 0.75%. PGRO is the cheaper option, by $26 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, PGRO or PJFG?
Over the past year PGRO returned +8.94% vs +10.08% for PJFG, so PJFG leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (4 years), PGRO annualized +23.68% vs +25.64% for PJFG. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, PGRO or PJFG?
PJFG has been the more volatile fund at 18.1% annualized versus 16.5% for PGRO. Worst drawdown: PGRO -23.3% vs PJFG -24.2%.
Should I hold both PGRO and PJFG?
PGRO and PJFG have a monthly-return correlation of 0.97, so they move almost identically. What is left to separate them is the fee and the index each one tracks. This is information, not a recommendation.
What is the holdings overlap between PGRO and PJFG?
77.9% of PJFG's money is in holdings PGRO also owns. 77.9% of PJFG's is in holdings PGRO also owns. They hold 22 positions in common, counted across the 40 positions we hold weights for in PGRO and 37 in PJFG.
Which pays a higher dividend, PGRO or PJFG?
PGRO yields 0.02% while PJFG yields 0.00%, so PGRO currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is PJFG better than PGRO?
PGRO has a lower expense ratio. PJFG led over 1Y, 3Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.97. PGRO is less concentrated, with 58.8% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 61.0%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.