ATFV vs. PFM
ATFV (Alger 35 ETF) and PFM (Invesco Dividend Achievers™ ETF) are both Large Cap Growth Equities funds - ATFV tracks the S&P 500 while PFM tracks the NASDAQ US Broad Dividend Achievers Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, ATFV returned 12.57%/yr vs 10.64%/yr for PFM. Their 0.59 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. ATFV charges 0.55%/yr vs 0.53%/yr for PFM.
Performance
ATFV vs. PFM - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
The year-to-date returns for both investments are quite close, with ATFV having a 10.01% return and PFM slightly higher at 10.31%.
ATFV
- 1D
- 2.68%
- 1M
- -2.89%
- 6M
- 12.26%
- YTD
- 10.01%
- 1Y
- 26.14%
- 3Y*
- 33.90%
- 5Y*
- 12.57%
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- 13.54%
PFM
- 1D
- -0.21%
- 1M
- 0.84%
- 6M
- 7.70%
- YTD
- 10.31%
- 1Y
- 19.09%
- 3Y*
- 14.88%
- 5Y*
- 10.64%
- 10Y*
- 11.60%
- ALL TIME*
- 8.77%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
ATFV Alger 35 ETF | $2.07M | $1.55M | $2.50M |
| $817.02K | $841.17K | $978.32K |
ATFV vs. PFM - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ATFV Alger 35 ETF | 10.01% | 38.20% | 46.14% | 32.75% | -35.97% | 3.03% |
PFM Invesco Dividend Achievers™ ETF | 10.31% | 14.00% | 16.87% | 11.40% | -6.22% | 11.30% |
Correlation
The correlation between ATFV and PFM is 0.43, which is low. Their historical price movements had little consistent relationship.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most. | 0.43 |
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history. | 0.50 |
Correlation (5Y) Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period. | 0.60 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 4, 2021 | 0.59 |
The correlation between ATFV and PFM shifts across timeframes, from 0.43 (1 year) to 0.60 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
ATFV vs. PFM - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
ATFV
PFM
Technology
Communication Services
Industrials
Healthcare
Consumer Cyclical
Utilities
Financial Services
Basic Materials
-
Consumer Defensive
-
Energy
-
Real Estate
-
Technology
ATFV
PFM
Communication Services
ATFV
PFM
Industrials
ATFV
PFM
Healthcare
ATFV
PFM
Consumer Cyclical
ATFV
PFM
Utilities
ATFV
PFM
Financial Services
ATFV
PFM
Basic Materials
ATFV
-
PFM
Consumer Defensive
ATFV
-
PFM
Energy
ATFV
-
PFM
Real Estate
ATFV
-
PFM
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
ATFV vs. PFM — Risk / Return Rank
ATFV
PFM
ATFV vs. PFM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Alger 35 ETF (ATFV) 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.
Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.
| ATFV | PFM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -1.09 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -1.49 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.16 | 1.35 | -0.19 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.23 | 2.57 | -1.34 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 3.72 | 10.53 | -6.81 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
ATFV vs. PFM - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum ATFV drawdown since its inception was -45.34%, smaller than the maximum PFM drawdown of -53.21%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ATFV and PFM.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| ATFV | PFM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -45.34% | -53.21% | +7.87% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -18.29% | -7.09% | -11.20% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -29.01% | -14.50% | -14.51% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -45.34% | -17.81% | -27.53% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -32.22% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -8.11% | -1.00% | -7.11% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -17.46% | -6.89% | -10.57% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 6.05% | 1.73% | +4.32% |
Volatility
ATFV vs. PFM - Volatility Comparison
Alger 35 ETF (ATFV) has a higher volatility of 10.70% compared to Invesco Dividend Achievers™ ETF (PFM) at 2.60%. This indicates that ATFV'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
| ATFV | PFM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 10.70% | 2.60% | +8.10% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 21.93% | 7.11% | +14.82% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 26.95% | 9.52% | +17.43% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 27.36% | 13.47% | +13.89% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 26.99% | 15.18% | +11.81% |
ATFV vs. PFM - Expense Ratio Comparison
ATFV has a 0.55% expense ratio, which is higher than PFM's 0.53% expense ratio.
Dividends
ATFV vs. PFM - Dividend Comparison
ATFV's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.18%, less than PFM's 1.32% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ATFV Alger 35 ETF | 0.18% | 0.20% | 0.16% | 0.01% | 0.06% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
PFM Invesco Dividend Achievers™ ETF | 1.32% | 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
ATFV and PFM have a correlation of 0.43, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
ATFV has higher volatility (10.70%) compared to PFM (2.60%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ATFV dropped -45.34% vs PFM's -53.21%.
On 5-year performance, ATFV leads with 12.57% vs 10.64% for PFM. On fees, PFM is cheaper at 0.53% per year. On volatility, PFM has been the lower-risk option at 2.60%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 5-year period, ATFV has performed better with a 12.57% return vs 10.64%. 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 0.55% for ATFV.
PFM has the higher dividend yield at 1.32%, compared with 0.18% for ATFV.
ATFV tracks S&P 500, while PFM tracks NASDAQ US Broad Dividend Achievers Index. They also come from different issuers: Alger and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.55% for ATFV and 0.53% for PFM.
PFM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.92 vs 0.84), 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.
Find the right allocation for ATFV 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