PJFV vs PVAL
PGIM Jennison Focused Value ETF vs Putnam Focused Large Cap Value ETF
Which is better, PJFV or PVAL?
Each has led over a different period.
PJFV has a lower expense ratio. PJFV led over 3Y and the full window, PVAL over 1Y. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.90. PJFV is less concentrated, with 41.1% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 42.7%.
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 | PJFV | PVAL |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.33%Best | 0.55% |
| AUM | $183M | $14.9B |
| Dividend Yield | 0.57% | 0.92% |
| Holdings | 37 | 93 |
| YTD Return | +20.68%Best | +17.95% |
| 1Y Return | +27.75% | +27.77%Best |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +24.90%Best | +24.11% |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | - | +16.54% |
| Volatility (annualized) | 11.7%Best | 11.8% |
| Max Drawdown | -18.1% | -15.4%Best |
| $10,000 over 3.8 years | $20,686Best | $20,318 |
| Top 10 Weight | 41.1%Best | 42.7% |
| Fund Family | PGIM Investments | Putnam Investments |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Value | Large Cap Value |
| Inception | Dec 12, 2022 | May 25, 2021 |
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).
PJFV vs PVAL 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.
PJFV vs PVAL Performance
PGIM Jennison Focused Value ETF (PJFV) is an ETF from PGIM Investments and Putnam Focused Large Cap Value ETF (PVAL) is an ETF from Putnam Investments. Over the past year PJFV returned +27.75% while PVAL returned +27.77%. Year to date, PJFV is up 20.68% versus a gain of 17.95% for PVAL.
Over three years, PJFV compounded at +24.90% per year against +24.11% for PVAL. Across the full 4-year window we track, PJFV has the edge at +21.08% annualized vs +20.51%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
PVAL has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 11.8% compared with 11.7% for PJFV. 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 -18.1% for PJFV and -15.4% for PVAL. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.90. They move almost in lockstep, so holding both mostly duplicates the same exposure.
Fees and Cost Over Time
PJFV charges 0.33% per year while PVAL charges 0.55%. On a $10,000 position that is $33 vs $55 annually, a gap of $22 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, PJFV currently yields 0.57% against 0.92% for PVAL.
Holdings Overlap
38.1% of PJFV's money is in holdings PVAL also owns. 36.4% of PVAL's money is in holdings PJFV also owns.
The two portfolios partly overlap.
11 positions in common, counted across the 35 positions we hold weights for in PJFV and 45 in PVAL, against full books of 37 and 93.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 32 positions for PVAL that do not appear in our book for PJFV (61.4% of the fund), and 21 for PJFV that do not appear in PVAL (52.5%).
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 PJFV | Weight in PVAL | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| MSFTMicrosoft Corp | 6.30% | 9.26% | 2.96% |
| AAPLApple, Inc | 5.66% | 6.69% | 1.03% |
| AMZNAmazon.Com Inc | 4.67% | 4.70% | 0.03% |
| XOMExxonmobil Corp. | 4.01% | 3.76% | 0.25% |
| BACBank of America Corp.: Financials | 2.21% | 2.69% | 0.48% |
| ABBVAbbvie Inc. | 2.93% | 1.94% | 0.99% |
| WMTWalmart, Inc. | 3.41% | 1.16% | 2.25% |
| GMGeneral Motors Co | 2.23% | 2.34% | 0.11% |
| AMDAdvanced Micro Devices Inc | 2.95% | 1.32% | 1.63% |
| AZN:LNAstraZeneca PLC | 1.71% | 1.49% | 0.22% |
38.1% of PJFV is already inside PVAL.
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, PJFV or PVAL?
PJFV has an expense ratio of 0.33% while PVAL charges 0.55%. PJFV is the cheaper option, by $22 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, PJFV or PVAL?
Over the past year PJFV returned +27.75% vs +27.77% for PVAL, so PVAL leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (4 years), PJFV annualized +21.08% vs +20.51% for PVAL. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, PJFV or PVAL?
PVAL has been the more volatile fund at 11.8% annualized versus 11.7% for PJFV. Worst drawdown: PJFV -18.1% vs PVAL -15.4%.
Should I hold both PJFV and PVAL?
PJFV and PVAL have a monthly-return correlation of 0.90, 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 PJFV and PVAL?
38.1% of PJFV's money is in holdings PVAL also owns. 36.4% of PVAL's is in holdings PJFV also owns. They hold 11 positions in common, counted across the 35 positions we hold weights for in PJFV and 45 in PVAL.
Which pays a higher dividend, PJFV or PVAL?
PJFV yields 0.57% while PVAL yields 0.92%, so PVAL currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is PVAL better than PJFV?
PJFV has a lower expense ratio. PJFV led over 3Y and the full window, PVAL over 1Y. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.90. PJFV is less concentrated, with 41.1% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 42.7%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.