PWRD vs ROCY

PWRD vs ROCY

Which is better, PWRD or ROCY?

ROCY costs less.

ROCY has a lower expense ratio. ROCY is less concentrated, with 42.9% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 51.2%.

Lower Fees: ROCYLess Concentrated: ROCY

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

MetricPWRDROCY
Expense Ratio0.75%0.35%Best
AUM$1.5B$754M
Dividend Yield0.06%2.82%
Holdings56236
YTD Return+7.03%+15.81%Best
1Y Return+5.53%-
3Y Return (annualized)+27.71%-
Top 10 Weight51.2%42.9%Best
Fund FamilyTCW ETFsJ.P. Morgan Asset Management
CategoryEquityEquity
StyleLarge Cap BlendLarge Cap Blend
InceptionFeb 2, 2022Mar 18, 2026

Not shown on this pair: 5Y Return (annualized), Volatility (annualized), Max Drawdown, $10,000 over the window.

PWRD vs ROCY 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.

Compare PWRD against instead:PWRD vs SPYPWRD vs QQQPWRD vs VOOPWRD vs VTIROCY against:ROCY vs VXUS

PWRD vs ROCY Performance

TCW Transform Systems ETF (PWRD) is an ETF from TCW ETFs and JPMorgan Equity Premium Yield ETF (ROCY) is an ETF from J.P. Morgan Asset Management. Year to date, PWRD is up 7.03% versus a gain of 15.81% for ROCY.

Past performance does not guarantee future results.

Fees and Cost Over Time

PWRD charges 0.75% per year while ROCY charges 0.35%. On a $10,000 position that is $75 vs $35 annually, a gap of $40 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, PWRD currently yields 0.06% against 2.82% for ROCY.

Holdings Overlap

PWRD already in ROCY25.4%
ROCY already in PWRD6.4%

25.4% of PWRD's money is in holdings ROCY also owns. 6.4% of ROCY's money is in holdings PWRD also owns.

PWRD and ROCY share little of their money.

7 positions in common, counted across the 28 positions we hold weights for in PWRD and 113 in ROCY, against full books of 56 and 236.

What only one of them owns

Our book lists 102 positions for ROCY that do not appear in our book for PWRD (89.9% of the fund), and 15 for PWRD that do not appear in ROCY (53.8%).

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

StockWeight in PWRDWeight in ROCYDifference
AVGOBroadcom Inc3.86%2.26%1.60%
ANETArista Networks Inc Common Stock5.57%0.24%5.33%
XOMExxon Mobil Corp.3.57%1.87%1.70%
TTTrane Technologies PLC|1253.40%0.71%2.69%
GEVGe Vernova, Inc.3.28%0.51%2.77%
ETNEaton Corp Plc2.78%0.60%2.18%
QQnity Electronics Inc2.98%0.20%2.78%

25.4% of PWRD is already inside ROCY.

You probably hold more than these two. Add the rest and see how much of the whole book is the same companies twice.

PWRDROCY

Free for up to 10 holdings. No account needed.

Frequently Asked Questions

Which is cheaper, PWRD or ROCY?

PWRD has an expense ratio of 0.75% while ROCY charges 0.35%. ROCY is the cheaper option, by $40 a year on a $10,000 investment.

What is the holdings overlap between PWRD and ROCY?

25.4% of PWRD's money is in holdings ROCY also owns. 6.4% of ROCY's is in holdings PWRD also owns. They hold 7 positions in common, counted across the 28 positions we hold weights for in PWRD and 113 in ROCY.

Which pays a higher dividend, PWRD or ROCY?

PWRD yields 0.06% while ROCY yields 2.82%, so ROCY currently pays the higher dividend yield.

Is ROCY better than PWRD?

ROCY has a lower expense ratio. ROCY is less concentrated, with 42.9% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 51.2%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.