BROL vs. PFM
BROL (Baron Risk Optimized Large Cap ETF) and PFM (Invesco Dividend Achievers™ ETF) are both Large Cap Growth Equities funds. BROL is actively managed, while PFM is passively managed. Their 0.54 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. BROL charges 0.45%/yr vs 0.53%/yr for PFM.
Performance
BROL vs. PFM - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
BROL
- 1D
- 0.76%
- 1M
- -1.89%
- 6M
- —
- YTD
- —
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- —
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) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $168.25K | $88.29K | $115.56K | |
| $817.02K | $841.17K | $978.32K |
BROL vs. PFM - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | |
|---|---|
BROL Baron Risk Optimized Large Cap ETF | 0.33% |
PFM Invesco Dividend Achievers™ ETF | 2.88% |
Correlation
The correlation between BROL and PFM is 0.54, which is moderate. They have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently, sharing some price drivers without tracking each other closely.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 27, 2026 | 0.54 |
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
BROL vs. PFM — Risk / Return Rank
BROL
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
PFM
BROL vs. PFM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Baron Risk Optimized Large Cap ETF (BROL) 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.
| BROL | PFM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | — | 1.35 | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | — | 2.57 | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | — | 10.53 | — |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
BROL vs. PFM - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum BROL drawdown since its inception was -4.67%, smaller than the maximum PFM drawdown of -53.21%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BROL and PFM.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| BROL | PFM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -4.67% | -53.21% | +48.54% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | — | -7.09% | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -14.50% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -17.81% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -32.22% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -2.83% | -1.00% | -1.83% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -1.84% | -6.89% | +5.05% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | — | 1.73% | — |
Volatility
BROL vs. PFM - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| BROL | PFM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | — | 2.60% | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | — | 7.11% | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 15.39% | 9.52% | +5.87% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 15.39% | 13.47% | +1.92% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 15.39% | 15.18% | +0.21% |
BROL vs. PFM - Expense Ratio Comparison
BROL has a 0.45% expense ratio, which is lower than PFM's 0.53% expense ratio.
Dividends
BROL vs. PFM - Dividend Comparison
BROL has not paid dividends to shareholders, while PFM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.32%.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
BROL Baron Risk Optimized Large Cap ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 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
BROL and PFM have a correlation of 0.54, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, BROL is cheaper at 0.45% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
BROL is cheaper with a 0.45% expense ratio, compared with 0.53% for PFM.
PFM has the higher dividend yield at 1.32%, compared with 0.00% for BROL.
They also come from different issuers: Baron Capital and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.45% for BROL and 0.53% for PFM.
Find the right allocation for BROL 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