PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
AESR vs. PFM
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

AESR vs. PFM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Anfield U.S. Equity Sector Rotation ETF (AESR) and Invesco Dividend Achievers™ ETF (PFM). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, AESR achieves a 20.98% return, which is significantly higher than PFM's 8.18% return.


AESR

1D
-0.05%
1M
7.94%
YTD
20.98%
6M
21.17%
1Y
39.18%
3Y*
26.82%
5Y*
15.28%
10Y*

PFM

1D
-0.23%
1M
3.40%
YTD
8.18%
6M
7.73%
1Y
19.65%
3Y*
16.31%
5Y*
10.63%
10Y*
11.82%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

AESR vs. PFM - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)2025202420232022202120202019
AESR
Anfield U.S. Equity Sector Rotation ETF
20.98%20.34%25.37%21.03%-17.52%25.26%19.58%0.76%
PFM
Invesco Dividend Achievers™ ETF
8.18%14.00%16.87%11.40%-6.22%23.08%9.53%0.90%

Correlation

The correlation between AESR and PFM is 0.72, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.72

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.75

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.82

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 18, 2019

0.82

The correlation between AESR and PFM shifts across timeframes, from 0.72 (1 year) to 0.82 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

AESR vs. PFM - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
AESR
PFM

Technology

33.8%
24.7%

Communication Services

26.0%
1.1%

Consumer Cyclical

12.8%
4.0%

Industrials

10.6%
11.1%

Financial Services

7.0%
18.5%

Basic Materials

2.7%
3.0%

Consumer Defensive

2.4%
12.0%

Energy

2.1%
4.7%

Healthcare

2.0%
14.9%

Utilities

0.3%
4.2%

Real Estate

0.3%
2.0%

Technology

AESR
33.8%
PFM
24.7%

Communication Services

AESR
26.0%
PFM
1.1%

Consumer Cyclical

AESR
12.8%
PFM
4.0%

Industrials

AESR
10.6%
PFM
11.1%

Financial Services

AESR
7.0%
PFM
18.5%

Basic Materials

AESR
2.7%
PFM
3.0%

Consumer Defensive

AESR
2.4%
PFM
12.0%

Energy

AESR
2.1%
PFM
4.7%

Healthcare

AESR
2.0%
PFM
14.9%

Utilities

AESR
0.3%
PFM
4.2%

Real Estate

AESR
0.3%
PFM
2.0%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.


Return for Risk

AESR vs. PFM — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

AESR
AESR Risk / Return Rank: 7575
Overall Rank
AESR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7373
Sharpe Ratio Rank
AESR Sortino Ratio Rank: 7070
Sortino Ratio Rank
AESR Omega Ratio Rank: 7070
Omega Ratio Rank
AESR Calmar Ratio Rank: 7878
Calmar Ratio Rank
AESR Martin Ratio Rank: 8383
Martin Ratio Rank

PFM
PFM Risk / Return Rank: 6262
Overall Rank
PFM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6161
Sharpe Ratio Rank
PFM Sortino Ratio Rank: 6666
Sortino Ratio Rank
PFM Omega Ratio Rank: 6161
Omega Ratio Rank
PFM Calmar Ratio Rank: 5656
Calmar Ratio Rank
PFM Martin Ratio Rank: 6363
Martin Ratio Rank
The rank (0–100) shows how this investment's returns compare to the risk taken. Higher = better. Based on the past 12 months of data, combining Sharpe, Sortino, and other metrics used by quantitative funds and institutional investors.

AESR vs. PFM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Anfield U.S. Equity Sector Rotation ETF (AESR) and Invesco Dividend Achievers™ ETF (PFM). Risk-adjusted metrics are performance indicators that assess an investment's returns in relation to its risk, enabling a more accurate comparison of different investment options.


AESRPFMDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.31

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.13

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.42

1.38

+0.05

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

4.01

2.78

+1.23

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

16.87

11.28

+5.59

AESR vs. PFM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current AESR Sharpe Ratio is 2.40, which is comparable to the PFM Sharpe Ratio of 2.09. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of AESR and PFM, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


AESRPFMDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.40

2.09

+0.31

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.86

0.79

+0.07

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.78

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.83

0.53

+0.31

Drawdowns

AESR vs. PFM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum AESR drawdown since its inception was -31.06%, smaller than the maximum PFM drawdown of -53.21%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for AESR and PFM.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


AESRPFMDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-31.06%

-53.21%

+22.15%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-9.82%

-7.09%

-2.73%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-19.85%

-14.50%

-5.35%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-25.04%

-17.81%

-7.23%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-32.22%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.05%

-0.23%

+0.18%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-6.02%

-6.94%

+0.92%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.33%

1.75%

+0.58%

Volatility

AESR vs. PFM - Volatility Comparison

Anfield U.S. Equity Sector Rotation ETF (AESR) has a higher volatility of 5.52% compared to Invesco Dividend Achievers™ ETF (PFM) at 2.04%. This indicates that AESR's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than PFM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


AESRPFMDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

5.52%

2.04%

+3.48%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

12.73%

7.13%

+5.60%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

16.39%

9.47%

+6.92%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

17.83%

13.54%

+4.29%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

20.44%

15.21%

+5.23%

AESR vs. PFM - Expense Ratio Comparison

AESR has a 1.46% expense ratio, which is higher than PFM's 0.53% expense ratio.


Dividends

AESR vs. PFM - Dividend Comparison

AESR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 19.03%, more than PFM's 1.33% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
AESR
Anfield U.S. Equity Sector Rotation ETF
19.03%23.02%0.17%0.33%0.73%6.59%1.06%0.33%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
PFM
Invesco Dividend Achievers™ ETF
1.33%1.41%1.58%1.86%1.95%1.69%1.92%1.94%2.27%1.70%2.56%2.36%

Frequently Asked Questions


AESR and PFM have a correlation of 0.72, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

AESR has higher volatility (5.52%) compared to PFM (2.04%). In terms of maximum drawdown, AESR dropped -31.06% vs PFM's -53.21%.

On 5-year performance, AESR leads with 15.28% vs 10.63% for PFM. On fees, PFM is cheaper at 0.53% per year. On volatility, PFM has been the lower-risk option at 2.04%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 5-year period, AESR has performed better with a 15.28% return vs 10.63%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

PFM is cheaper with a 0.53% expense ratio, compared with 1.46% for AESR.

AESR has the higher dividend yield at 19.03%, compared with 1.33% for PFM.

They also come from different issuers: Regents Park Funds and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 1.46% for AESR and 0.53% for PFM.

AESR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.40 vs 2.09), meaning it's delivered slightly more return per unit of risk over the trailing 12 months. However, this ranking shifts over time - use the Risk/Return Score above for a more comprehensive view that combines Sharpe, Sortino, and other measures used by quantitative funds.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for AESR and PFM

Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.

Open Portfolio Optimizer