BDIV vs. TRFM

Last updated Aug 2, 2026

BDIV (AAM Brentview Dividend Growth ETF) and TRFM (AAM Transformers ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - BDIV is a Large Cap Value Equities fund actively managed by AAM, while TRFM is a Technology Equities fund tracking the Pence Transformers Index - Benchmark TR Gross. BDIV is actively managed, while TRFM is passively managed. Over the past year, BDIV returned 20.14% vs 34.05% for TRFM. Their 0.67 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. Both charge a 0.49% expense ratio.

Performance

BDIV vs. TRFM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in AAM Brentview Dividend Growth ETF (BDIV) and AAM Transformers ETF (TRFM). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BDIV achieves a 10.04% return, which is significantly lower than TRFM's 21.27% return.

BDIV

• 1D: -0.08%
• 1M: 1.31%
• 6M: 7.69%
• YTD: 10.04%
• 1Y: 20.14%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 15.95%

TRFM

• 1D: 0.52%
• 1M: -5.31%
• 6M: 17.60%
• YTD: 21.27%
• 1Y: 34.05%
• 3Y*: 23.92%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 23.93%

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
BDIV AAM Brentview Dividend Growth ETF	$66.95K	$59.67K	$64.41K
TRFM AAM Transformers ETF	$2.71M	$2.26M	$1.99M

BDIV vs. TRFM - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
BDIV AAM Brentview Dividend Growth ETF	10.04%	18.59%	3.01%
TRFM AAM Transformers ETF	21.27%	25.76%	16.81%

Correlation

The correlation between BDIV and TRFM is 0.63, which is moderate. They have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently, sharing some price drivers without tracking each other closely.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.63
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 31, 2024	0.67

The correlation between BDIV and TRFM has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.63 to 0.67 - a consistent structural relationship.

BDIV vs. TRFM - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	BDIV	TRFM
Technology	21.3%	54.7%
Financial Services	14.4%	1.8%
Industrials	13.8%	20.7%
Healthcare	10.9%	0.2%
Consumer Defensive	6.8%	0.2%
Utilities	6.6%	10.8%
Energy	6.1%	3.5%
Communication Services	5.2%	4.7%
Consumer Cyclical	4.4%	5.2%
Basic Materials	4.2%	0.5%
Real Estate	3.7%	-

Return for Risk

BDIV vs. TRFM — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

BDIV

BDIV Risk / Return Rank: 83
BDIV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 85
BDIV Sortino Ratio Rank: 86
BDIV Omega Ratio Rank: 83
BDIV Calmar Ratio Rank: 77
BDIV Martin Ratio Rank: 82

TRFM

TRFM Risk / Return Rank: 54
TRFM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 50
TRFM Sortino Ratio Rank: 48
TRFM Omega Ratio Rank: 46
TRFM Calmar Ratio Rank: 70
TRFM Martin Ratio Rank: 58

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

BDIV vs. TRFM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for AAM Brentview Dividend Growth ETF (BDIV) and AAM Transformers ETF (TRFM). 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.

	BDIV	TRFM	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.00	1.24	+0.76
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.90	1.73	+1.17
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.36	1.21	+0.15
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.75	2.43	+0.32
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	10.97	6.98	+3.99

BDIV vs. TRFM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BDIV Sharpe Ratio is 2.00, which is higher than the TRFM Sharpe Ratio of 1.24. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BDIV and TRFM, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

BDIV vs. TRFM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BDIV drawdown since its inception was -14.98%, smaller than the maximum TRFM drawdown of -28.40%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BDIV and TRFM.

Drawdown Indicators

	BDIV	TRFM	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-14.98%	-28.40%	+13.42%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-7.01%	-12.99%	+5.98%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-28.40%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.32%	-8.52%	+8.20%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.87%	-6.56%	+4.69%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.76%	4.52%	-2.76%

Volatility

BDIV vs. TRFM - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for AAM Brentview Dividend Growth ETF (BDIV) is 2.46%, while AAM Transformers ETF (TRFM) has a volatility of 7.74%. This indicates that BDIV experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than TRFM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	BDIV	TRFM	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.46%	7.74%	-5.28%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	7.15%	20.87%	-13.72%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	9.69%	25.57%	-15.88%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	13.06%	27.26%	-14.20%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	13.06%	27.26%	-14.20%

BDIV vs. TRFM - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both BDIV and TRFM have an expense ratio of 0.49%.

Dividends

BDIV vs. TRFM - Dividend Comparison

BDIV's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.55%, more than TRFM's 0.14% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024
BDIV AAM Brentview Dividend Growth ETF	1.55%	1.14%	0.62%
TRFM AAM Transformers ETF	0.14%	0.17%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both BDIV and TRFM in my portfolio?

BDIV and TRFM have a correlation of 0.63, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, BDIV or TRFM?

TRFM has higher volatility (7.74%) compared to BDIV (2.46%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BDIV dropped -14.98% vs TRFM's -28.40%.

Which ETF is better, BDIV or TRFM?

On 1-year performance, TRFM leads with 34.05% vs 20.14% for BDIV. Both ETFs have the same 0.49% expense ratio. On volatility, BDIV has been the lower-risk option at 2.46%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, BDIV or TRFM?

Over the 1-year period, TRFM has performed better with a 34.05% return vs 20.14%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, BDIV or TRFM?

BDIV and TRFM have the same expense ratio: 0.49% per year.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, BDIV or TRFM?

BDIV has the higher dividend yield at 1.55%, compared with 0.14% for TRFM.

What is the main difference between BDIV and TRFM?

BDIV is categorized as Large Cap Value Equities, while TRFM is Technology Equities.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

BDIV currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.00 vs 1.24), 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.