DARP vs. PFM

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

DARP (Grizzle Growth ETF) and PFM (Invesco Dividend Achievers™ ETF) are both Large Cap Growth Equities funds. DARP is actively managed, while PFM is passively managed. Over the past year, DARP returned 68.50% vs 18.00% for PFM. A 0.52 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. DARP charges 0.75%/yr vs 0.53%/yr for PFM.

Performance

DARP vs. PFM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Grizzle Growth ETF (DARP) and Invesco Dividend Achievers™ ETF (PFM). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, DARP achieves a 26.21% return, which is significantly higher than PFM's 7.43% return.

DARP

• 1D: -4.47%
• 1M: -1.76%
• YTD: 26.21%
• 6M: 25.50%
• 1Y: 68.50%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

PFM

• 1D: -0.16%
• 1M: 0.12%
• YTD: 7.43%
• 6M: 6.87%
• 1Y: 18.00%
• 3Y*: 15.64%
• 5Y*: 10.77%
• 10Y*: 11.76%

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

DARP vs. PFM - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
DARP Grizzle Growth ETF	26.21%	40.19%	24.63%	6.25%
PFM Invesco Dividend Achievers™ ETF	7.43%	14.00%	16.87%	6.45%

Correlation

The correlation between DARP and PFM is 0.47, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.47
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 28, 2023	0.52

The correlation between DARP and PFM has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.47 to 0.52 - a consistent structural relationship.

DARP vs. PFM - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	DARP	PFM
Technology	49.5%	27.6%
Communication Services	17.2%	1.1%
Energy	8.2%	4.3%
Industrials	7.7%	10.7%
Consumer Cyclical	5.6%	3.7%
Utilities	4.6%	3.9%
Basic Materials	3.2%	2.8%
Healthcare	1.4%	15.1%
Consumer Defensive	-	11.1%
Financial Services	-	17.9%
Real Estate	-	2.0%

Return for Risk

DARP vs. PFM — Risk / Return Rank

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

DARP

DARP Risk / Return Rank: 85
DARP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 89
DARP Sortino Ratio Rank: 76
DARP Omega Ratio Rank: 78
DARP Calmar Ratio Rank: 92
DARP Martin Ratio Rank: 91

PFM

PFM Risk / Return Rank: 60
PFM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 61
PFM Sortino Ratio Rank: 65
PFM Omega Ratio Rank: 59
PFM Calmar Ratio Rank: 55
PFM Martin Ratio Rank: 61

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.

DARP vs. PFM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Grizzle Growth ETF (DARP) 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.

	DARP	PFM	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.77	1.91	+0.87
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.19	2.79	+0.40
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.43	1.34	+0.09
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	5.83	2.55	+3.28
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	20.69	10.32	+10.37

DARP vs. PFM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current DARP Sharpe Ratio is 2.77, which is higher than the PFM Sharpe Ratio of 1.91. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of DARP 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.

Drawdowns

DARP vs. PFM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum DARP drawdown since its inception was -30.27%, smaller than the maximum PFM drawdown of -53.21%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for DARP and PFM.

Drawdown Indicators

	DARP	PFM	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-30.27%	-53.21%	+22.94%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-11.82%	-7.09%	-4.73%
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 Drawdown Current decline from peak	-5.59%	-1.01%	-4.58%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-4.64%	-6.93%	+2.29%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.32%	1.75%	+1.57%

Volatility

DARP vs. PFM - Volatility Comparison

Grizzle Growth ETF (DARP) has a higher volatility of 10.71% compared to Invesco Dividend Achievers™ ETF (PFM) at 2.48%. This indicates that DARP'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.

Volatility by Period

	DARP	PFM	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	10.71%	2.48%	+8.23%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	19.20%	7.21%	+11.99%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	24.83%	9.53%	+15.30%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	26.48%	13.51%	+12.97%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	26.48%	15.20%	+11.28%

DARP vs. PFM - Expense Ratio Comparison

DARP has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is higher than PFM's 0.53% expense ratio.

Dividends

DARP vs. PFM - Dividend Comparison

DARP's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.34%, less than PFM's 1.36% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
DARP Grizzle Growth ETF	0.34%	0.43%	1.93%	0.32%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
PFM Invesco Dividend Achievers™ ETF	1.36%	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

Can I hold both DARP and PFM in my portfolio?

DARP and PFM have a correlation of 0.47, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, DARP or PFM?

DARP has higher volatility (10.71%) compared to PFM (2.48%). In terms of maximum drawdown, DARP dropped -30.27% vs PFM's -53.21%.

Which ETF is better, DARP or PFM?

On 1-year performance, DARP leads with 68.50% vs 18.00% for PFM. On fees, PFM is cheaper at 0.53% per year. On volatility, PFM has been the lower-risk option at 2.48%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, DARP or PFM?

Over the 1-year period, DARP has performed better with a 68.50% return vs 18.00%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, DARP or PFM?

PFM is cheaper with a 0.53% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for DARP.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, DARP or PFM?

PFM has the higher dividend yield at 1.36%, compared with 0.34% for DARP.

What is the main difference between DARP and PFM?

They also come from different issuers: Grizzle and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.75% for DARP and 0.53% for PFM.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

DARP currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.77 vs 1.91), 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.