BUYZ vs. TDVG

Last updated Jun 25, 2026

BUYZ (Franklin Disruptive Commerce ETF) and TDVG (T. Rowe Price Dividend Growth ETF) are both Large Cap Growth Equities funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past 5 years, BUYZ returned -8.80%/yr vs 10.13%/yr for TDVG. A 0.61 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. Both charge a 0.50% expense ratio.

Performance

BUYZ vs. TDVG - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Franklin Disruptive Commerce ETF (BUYZ) and T. Rowe Price Dividend Growth ETF (TDVG). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BUYZ achieves a -15.91% return, which is significantly lower than TDVG's 8.26% return.

BUYZ

• 1D: 1.72%
• 1M: -1.24%
• YTD: -15.91%
• 6M: -17.42%
• 1Y: -15.70%
• 3Y*: 9.84%
• 5Y*: -8.80%
• 10Y*: —

TDVG

• 1D: 0.21%
• 1M: 1.43%
• YTD: 8.26%
• 6M: 7.09%
• 1Y: 16.92%
• 3Y*: 15.63%
• 5Y*: 10.13%
• 10Y*: —

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

BUYZ vs. TDVG - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
BUYZ Franklin Disruptive Commerce ETF	-15.91%	8.70%	28.25%	39.13%	-49.81%	-19.38%	23.65%
TDVG T. Rowe Price Dividend Growth ETF	8.26%	14.80%	13.45%	13.95%	-10.15%	26.20%	12.97%

Correlation

The correlation between BUYZ and TDVG is 0.50, 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	0.50
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.64
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.67
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 5, 2020	0.61

The correlation between BUYZ and TDVG shifts across timeframes, from 0.50 (1 year) to 0.67 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

BUYZ vs. TDVG - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	BUYZ	TDVG
Consumer Cyclical	35.1%	7.2%
Technology	22.4%	26.2%
Communication Services	19.4%	1.0%
Financial Services	6.2%	19.3%
Consumer Defensive	6.1%	6.9%
Industrials	5.1%	13.6%
Real Estate	3.2%	1.6%
Healthcare	0.7%	12.4%
Basic Materials	-	2.8%
Energy	-	5.3%
Utilities	-	3.8%

Return for Risk

BUYZ vs. TDVG — Risk / Return Rank

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

BUYZ

BUYZ Risk / Return Rank: 4
BUYZ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4
BUYZ Sortino Ratio Rank: 4
BUYZ Omega Ratio Rank: 4
BUYZ Calmar Ratio Rank: 5
BUYZ Martin Ratio Rank: 5

TDVG

TDVG Risk / Return Rank: 58
TDVG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 59
TDVG Sortino Ratio Rank: 60
TDVG Omega Ratio Rank: 56
TDVG Calmar Ratio Rank: 53
TDVG Martin Ratio Rank: 60

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.

BUYZ vs. TDVG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Franklin Disruptive Commerce ETF (BUYZ) and T. Rowe Price Dividend Growth ETF (TDVG). 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.

	BUYZ	TDVG	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.70	1.75	-2.44
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-0.84	2.51	-3.35
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.90	1.31	-0.41
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.51	2.35	-2.86
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-0.97	9.64	-10.61

BUYZ vs. TDVG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BUYZ Sharpe Ratio is -0.70, which is lower than the TDVG Sharpe Ratio of 1.75. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BUYZ and TDVG, 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

BUYZ vs. TDVG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BUYZ drawdown since its inception was -68.04%, which is greater than TDVG's maximum drawdown of -19.20%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BUYZ and TDVG.

Drawdown Indicators

	BUYZ	TDVG	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-68.04%	-19.20%	-48.84%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-30.85%	-7.24%	-23.61%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-30.85%	-14.02%	-16.83%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-63.32%	-19.20%	-44.12%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-45.73%	-0.61%	-45.12%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-38.80%	-3.72%	-35.08%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	16.22%	1.76%	+14.46%

Volatility

BUYZ vs. TDVG - Volatility Comparison

Franklin Disruptive Commerce ETF (BUYZ) has a higher volatility of 7.08% compared to T. Rowe Price Dividend Growth ETF (TDVG) at 2.70%. This indicates that BUYZ's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than TDVG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	BUYZ	TDVG	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	7.08%	2.70%	+4.38%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	17.82%	7.60%	+10.22%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	22.71%	9.76%	+12.95%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	27.22%	13.92%	+13.30%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	29.88%	13.90%	+15.98%

BUYZ vs. TDVG - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both BUYZ and TDVG have an expense ratio of 0.50%.

Dividends

BUYZ vs. TDVG - Dividend Comparison

BUYZ has not paid dividends to shareholders, while TDVG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.98%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
BUYZ Franklin Disruptive Commerce ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.07%	0.00%	0.00%	0.77%	0.00%
TDVG T. Rowe Price Dividend Growth ETF	0.98%	1.00%	1.06%	1.31%	1.15%	0.80%	0.40%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both BUYZ and TDVG in my portfolio?

BUYZ and TDVG have a correlation of 0.50, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, BUYZ or TDVG?

BUYZ has higher volatility (7.08%) compared to TDVG (2.70%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BUYZ dropped -68.04% vs TDVG's -19.20%.

Which ETF is better, BUYZ or TDVG?

On 5-year performance, TDVG leads with 10.13% vs -8.80% for BUYZ. Both ETFs have the same 0.50% expense ratio. On volatility, TDVG has been the lower-risk option at 2.70%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, BUYZ or TDVG?

Over the 5-year period, TDVG has performed better with a 10.13% return vs -8.80%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, BUYZ or TDVG?

BUYZ and TDVG have the same expense ratio: 0.50% per year.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, BUYZ or TDVG?

TDVG has the higher dividend yield at 0.98%, compared with 0.00% for BUYZ.

What is the main difference between BUYZ and TDVG?

They also come from different issuers: Franklin Templeton and T. Rowe Price.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

TDVG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.75 vs -0.70), 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.