PCSG vs QQQ
Polen 5Perspectives Small-Mid Growth ETF vs Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1
Which is better, PCSG or QQQ?
Mid Cap Growth against Large Cap Growth.
QQQ has a lower expense ratio. PCSG is less concentrated, with 26.2% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 46.9%.
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 | PCSG | QQQ |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.60% | 0.18%Best |
| AUM | $3M | $437.3B |
| Dividend Yield | 0.00% | 0.43% |
| Holdings | 171 | 208 |
| YTD Return | -14.23% | +11.18%Best |
| 1Y Return | - | +9.52% |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | - | +22.24% |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | - | +12.11% |
| Top 10 Weight | 26.2%Best | 46.9% |
| Fund Family | Polen Capital | Invesco (US) |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Mid Cap Growth | Large Cap Growth |
| Inception | May 18, 2026 | Mar 10, 1999 |
Not shown on this pair: Volatility (annualized), Max Drawdown, $10,000 over the window.
PCSG vs QQQ 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 is available from the range buttons; it is not the opening view here because over the whole period one of these two funds moves so much further than the other that its line would sit flat on the axis.
PCSG vs QQQ Performance
Polen 5Perspectives Small-Mid Growth ETF (PCSG) is an ETF from Polen Capital and Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1 (QQQ) is an ETF from Invesco (US). Year to date, PCSG is down 14.23% versus a gain of 11.18% for QQQ.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Fees and Cost Over Time
PCSG charges 0.60% per year while QQQ charges 0.18%. On a $10,000 position that is $60 vs $18 annually, a gap of $42 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, PCSG currently yields 0.00% against 0.43% for QQQ.
Holdings Overlap
We hold position weights for 86 holdings in PCSG and 101 in QQQ, totalling 100.0% and 99.7% 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 86 positions we hold weights for in PCSG and 101 in QQQ, against full books of 171 and 208.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 94 positions for QQQ that do not appear in our book for PCSG (97.2% of the fund), and 78 for PCSG that do not appear in QQQ (89.5%).
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.
You are not choosing between two funds in isolation.
Whichever of PCSG and QQQ 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, PCSG or QQQ?
PCSG has an expense ratio of 0.60% while QQQ charges 0.18%. QQQ is the cheaper option, by $42 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which pays a higher dividend, PCSG or QQQ?
PCSG yields 0.00% while QQQ yields 0.43%, so QQQ currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is QQQ better than PCSG?
QQQ has a lower expense ratio. PCSG is less concentrated, with 26.2% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 46.9%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.