ABFL vs PBDC
Abacus FCF Leaders ETF vs Putnam BDC Income ETF
Which is better, ABFL or PBDC?
ABFL has been ahead.
ABFL has a lower expense ratio. ABFL led over 1Y, 3Y and the full window. ABFL is less concentrated, with 34.8% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 71.7%.
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 | ABFL | PBDC |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.49%Best | 11.77% |
| AUM | $606M | $279M |
| Dividend Yield | 0.60% | 11.41% |
| Holdings | 114 | 54 |
| YTD Return | +8.65%Best | -6.30% |
| 1Y Return | +8.21%Best | -2.81% |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +14.92%Best | +5.15% |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +8.65% | - |
| Volatility (annualized) | 13.4%Best | 14.6% |
| Max Drawdown | -19.9%Best | -20.5% |
| $10,000 over 4.1 years | $18,671Best | $15,961 |
| Top 10 Weight | 34.8%Best | 71.7% |
| Fund Family | FCF Advisors | Putnam Investments |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Blend | Large Cap Blend |
| Inception | Sep 27, 2016 | Sep 29, 2022 |
Volatility and max drawdown, and the $10,000 over 4.1 years row, are measured over the window both funds cover: Sep 30, 2022 to Nov 11, 2026 (4.1 years).
ABFL vs PBDC 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 4.1 years both funds cover.
ABFL vs PBDC Performance
Abacus FCF Leaders ETF (ABFL) is an ETF from FCF Advisors and Putnam BDC Income ETF (PBDC) is an ETF from Putnam Investments. Over the past year ABFL returned +8.21% while PBDC returned -2.81%. Year to date, ABFL is up 8.65% versus a loss of 6.30% for PBDC.
Over three years, ABFL compounded at +14.92% per year against +5.15% for PBDC. Across the full 4-year window we track, ABFL has the edge at +16.45% annualized vs +12.08%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
PBDC has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 14.6% compared with 13.4% for ABFL. 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 -19.9% for ABFL and -20.5% for PBDC. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.42. They move together some of the time, and apart the rest.
Fees and Cost Over Time
ABFL charges 0.49% per year while PBDC charges 11.77%. On a $10,000 position that is $49 vs $1177 annually, a gap of $1128 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, ABFL currently yields 0.60% against 11.41% for PBDC.
Holdings Overlap
We hold position weights for 54 holdings in ABFL and 26 in PBDC, totalling 99.6% and 100.0% of the two funds. The two books name no position in common, so there is no overlap percentage to show.
0 positions in common, counted across the 54 positions we hold weights for in ABFL and 26 in PBDC, against full books of 114 and 54.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 26 positions for PBDC that do not appear in our book for ABFL (100.0% of the fund), and 52 for ABFL that do not appear in PBDC (96.3%).
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.
You are not choosing between two funds in isolation.
Whichever of ABFL and PBDC 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, ABFL or PBDC?
ABFL has an expense ratio of 0.49% while PBDC charges 11.77%. ABFL is the cheaper option, by $1128 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, ABFL or PBDC?
Over the past year ABFL returned +8.21% vs -2.81% for PBDC, so ABFL leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (4 years), ABFL annualized +16.45% vs +12.08% for PBDC. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, ABFL or PBDC?
PBDC has been the more volatile fund at 14.6% annualized versus 13.4% for ABFL. Worst drawdown: ABFL -19.9% vs PBDC -20.5%.
Should I hold both ABFL and PBDC?
ABFL and PBDC have a monthly-return correlation of 0.42, so their returns are far enough apart for the mix to behave differently from either one alone. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which pays a higher dividend, ABFL or PBDC?
ABFL yields 0.60% while PBDC yields 11.41%, so PBDC currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is PBDC better than ABFL?
ABFL has a lower expense ratio. ABFL led over 1Y, 3Y and the full window. ABFL is less concentrated, with 34.8% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 71.7%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.