FLQL vs. TDVG

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

FLQL (Franklin LibertyQ U.S. Equity ETF) and TDVG (T. Rowe Price Dividend Growth ETF) are both Large Cap Growth Equities funds. FLQL is passively managed, while TDVG is actively managed. Over the past 5 years, FLQL returned 14.33%/yr vs 10.19%/yr for TDVG. Their correlation of 0.89 suggests significant overlap in exposure. FLQL charges 0.15%/yr vs 0.50%/yr for TDVG.

Performance

FLQL vs. TDVG - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Franklin LibertyQ U.S. Equity ETF (FLQL) 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, FLQL achieves a 11.18% return, which is significantly higher than TDVG's 8.04% return.

FLQL

• 1D: -1.38%
• 1M: -0.31%
• YTD: 11.18%
• 6M: 9.76%
• 1Y: 26.76%
• 3Y*: 22.29%
• 5Y*: 14.33%
• 10Y*: —

TDVG

• 1D: -0.55%
• 1M: 1.22%
• YTD: 8.04%
• 6M: 7.41%
• 1Y: 17.57%
• 3Y*: 15.55%
• 5Y*: 10.19%
• 10Y*: —

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

FLQL vs. TDVG - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
FLQL Franklin LibertyQ U.S. Equity ETF	11.18%	19.64%	24.33%	23.58%	-14.83%	26.58%	12.61%
TDVG T. Rowe Price Dividend Growth ETF	8.04%	14.80%	13.45%	13.95%	-10.15%	26.20%	12.97%

Correlation

The correlation between FLQL and TDVG is 0.80, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.80
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.83
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.88
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 5, 2020	0.89

The correlation between FLQL and TDVG has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.80 to 0.89 - a consistent structural relationship.

FLQL vs. TDVG - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	FLQL	TDVG
Technology	37.0%	26.2%
Communication Services	11.7%	1.0%
Consumer Cyclical	11.3%	7.2%
Healthcare	10.1%	12.4%
Financial Services	9.6%	19.3%
Industrials	9.5%	13.6%
Consumer Defensive	4.1%	6.9%
Real Estate	2.7%	1.6%
Basic Materials	1.7%	2.8%
Utilities	1.4%	3.8%
Energy	0.9%	5.3%

Return for Risk

FLQL vs. TDVG — Risk / Return Rank

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

FLQL

FLQL Risk / Return Rank: 67
FLQL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 65
FLQL Sortino Ratio Rank: 64
FLQL Omega Ratio Rank: 65
FLQL Calmar Ratio Rank: 63
FLQL Martin Ratio Rank: 76

TDVG

TDVG Risk / Return Rank: 56
TDVG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 56
TDVG Sortino Ratio Rank: 58
TDVG Omega Ratio Rank: 54
TDVG Calmar Ratio Rank: 52
TDVG Martin Ratio Rank: 59

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.

FLQL vs. TDVG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Franklin LibertyQ U.S. Equity ETF (FLQL) 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.

	FLQL	TDVG	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.00	1.81	+0.19
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.79	2.60	+0.19
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.37	1.32	+0.04
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.97	2.44	+0.53
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	13.71	10.01	+3.69

FLQL vs. TDVG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FLQL Sharpe Ratio is 2.00, which is comparable to the TDVG Sharpe Ratio of 1.81. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FLQL 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

FLQL vs. TDVG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FLQL drawdown since its inception was -33.64%, which is greater than TDVG's maximum drawdown of -19.20%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FLQL and TDVG.

Drawdown Indicators

	FLQL	TDVG	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-33.64%	-19.20%	-14.44%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-9.05%	-7.24%	-1.81%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-19.32%	-14.02%	-5.30%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-21.41%	-19.20%	-2.21%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.01%	-0.82%	-1.19%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-4.03%	-3.73%	-0.30%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.96%	1.76%	+0.20%

Volatility

FLQL vs. TDVG - Volatility Comparison

Franklin LibertyQ U.S. Equity ETF (FLQL) has a higher volatility of 4.83% compared to T. Rowe Price Dividend Growth ETF (TDVG) at 2.78%. This indicates that FLQL'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

	FLQL	TDVG	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.83%	2.78%	+2.05%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	10.94%	7.61%	+3.33%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	13.47%	9.79%	+3.68%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	16.22%	13.92%	+2.30%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	17.52%	13.90%	+3.62%

FLQL vs. TDVG - Expense Ratio Comparison

FLQL has a 0.15% expense ratio, which is lower than TDVG's 0.50% expense ratio.

Dividends

FLQL vs. TDVG - Dividend Comparison

FLQL's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.02%, more than TDVG's 0.98% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
FLQL Franklin LibertyQ U.S. Equity ETF	1.02%	1.10%	1.13%	1.50%	2.07%	1.81%	1.99%	1.78%	1.82%	1.22%
TDVG T. Rowe Price Dividend Growth ETF	0.98%	1.00%	1.06%	1.31%	1.15%	0.80%	0.40%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FLQL and TDVG in my portfolio?

FLQL and TDVG have a correlation of 0.80, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, FLQL or TDVG?

FLQL has higher volatility (4.83%) compared to TDVG (2.78%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FLQL dropped -33.64% vs TDVG's -19.20%.

Which ETF is better, FLQL or TDVG?

On 5-year performance, FLQL leads with 14.33% vs 10.19% for TDVG. On fees, FLQL is cheaper at 0.15% per year. On volatility, TDVG has been the lower-risk option at 2.78%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FLQL or TDVG?

Over the 5-year period, FLQL has performed better with a 14.33% return vs 10.19%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FLQL or TDVG?

FLQL is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.50% for TDVG.

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

FLQL has the higher dividend yield at 1.02%, compared with 0.98% for TDVG.

What is the main difference between FLQL and TDVG?

They also come from different issuers: Franklin Templeton and T. Rowe Price. Their fees differ too: 0.15% for FLQL and 0.50% for TDVG.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FLQL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.00 vs 1.81), 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.