FWD vs. PID

Last updated Aug 2, 2026

FWD (AB Disruptors ETF) and PID (Invesco International Dividend Achievers™ ETF) are both Global Equities funds. FWD is actively managed, while PID is passively managed. Over the past 3 years, FWD returned 29.50%/yr vs 12.62%/yr for PID. Their 0.41 correlation means their historical movements had little consistent relationship. FWD charges 0.65%/yr vs 0.56%/yr for PID.

Performance

FWD vs. PID - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in AB Disruptors ETF (FWD) and Invesco International Dividend Achievers™ ETF (PID). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FWD achieves a 20.07% return, which is significantly higher than PID's 8.06% return.

FWD

• 1D: 1.20%
• 1M: -8.86%
• 6M: 11.18%
• YTD: 20.07%
• 1Y: 39.21%
• 3Y*: 29.50%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 31.81%

PID

• 1D: -0.89%
• 1M: 3.23%
• 6M: 4.55%
• YTD: 8.06%
• 1Y: 17.63%
• 3Y*: 12.62%
• 5Y*: 9.36%
• 10Y*: 9.15%
• ALL TIME*: 5.72%

*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)
FWD AB Disruptors ETF	$39.66M	$42.86M	$36.96M
PID Invesco International Dividend Achievers™ ETF	$1.28M	$1.81M	$1.50M

FWD vs. PID - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
FWD AB Disruptors ETF	20.07%	32.00%	29.23%	23.48%
PID Invesco International Dividend Achievers™ ETF	8.06%	24.45%	3.08%	10.64%

Correlation

The correlation between FWD and PID is 0.26, which is low. Their historical price movements had little consistent relationship.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.26
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history.	0.40
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 22, 2023	0.41

The correlation between FWD and PID shifts across timeframes, from 0.26 (1 year) to 0.41 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

FWD vs. PID - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	FWD	PID
Technology	51.2%	8.5%
Industrials	16.7%	8.1%
Healthcare	8.1%	8.6%
Communication Services	3.8%	13.5%
Consumer Cyclical	3.4%	6.5%
Basic Materials	1.8%	3.5%
Energy	0.8%	10.4%
Consumer Defensive	0.8%	7.1%
Real Estate	0.8%	0.5%
Financial Services	0.5%	18.7%
Utilities	0.3%	14.6%

Return for Risk

FWD vs. PID — Risk / Return Rank

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

FWD

FWD Risk / Return Rank: 51
FWD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 51
FWD Sortino Ratio Rank: 48
FWD Omega Ratio Rank: 48
FWD Calmar Ratio Rank: 50
FWD Martin Ratio Rank: 58

PID

PID Risk / Return Rank: 74
PID Sharpe Ratio Rank: 79
PID Sortino Ratio Rank: 82
PID Omega Ratio Rank: 78
PID Calmar Ratio Rank: 68
PID Martin Ratio Rank: 62

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.

FWD vs. PID - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for AB Disruptors ETF (FWD) and Invesco International Dividend Achievers™ ETF (PID). 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.

	FWD	PID	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.24	1.80	-0.56
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.72	2.65	-0.93
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.22	1.33	-0.11
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.78	2.35	-0.56
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	6.86	7.45	-0.59

FWD vs. PID - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FWD Sharpe Ratio is 1.24, which is lower than the PID Sharpe Ratio of 1.80. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FWD and PID, 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

FWD vs. PID - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FWD drawdown since its inception was -29.02%, smaller than the maximum PID drawdown of -66.34%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FWD and PID.

Drawdown Indicators

	FWD	PID	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-29.02%	-66.34%	+37.32%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-20.49%	-7.47%	-13.02%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-29.02%	-11.39%	-17.63%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-22.97%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-46.07%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-15.78%	-1.08%	-14.70%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-4.26%	-12.95%	+8.69%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	5.32%	2.35%	+2.97%

Volatility

FWD vs. PID - Volatility Comparison

AB Disruptors ETF (FWD) has a higher volatility of 11.37% compared to Invesco International Dividend Achievers™ ETF (PID) at 2.68%. This indicates that FWD's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than PID based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FWD	PID	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	11.37%	2.68%	+8.69%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	24.87%	7.84%	+17.03%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	29.47%	9.75%	+19.72%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	26.00%	13.92%	+12.08%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	26.00%	17.56%	+8.44%

FWD vs. PID - Expense Ratio Comparison

FWD has a 0.65% expense ratio, which is higher than PID's 0.56% expense ratio.

Dividends

FWD vs. PID - Dividend Comparison

FWD's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.09%, less than PID's 3.45% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
FWD AB Disruptors ETF	0.09%	0.11%	1.89%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
PID Invesco International Dividend Achievers™ ETF	3.45%	3.28%	3.88%	3.31%	3.30%	3.30%	3.16%	3.99%	3.87%	3.46%	3.90%	4.48%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FWD and PID in my portfolio?

FWD and PID have a correlation of 0.26, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, FWD or PID?

FWD has higher volatility (11.37%) compared to PID (2.68%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FWD dropped -29.02% vs PID's -66.34%.

Which ETF is better, FWD or PID?

On 3-year performance, FWD leads with 29.50% vs 12.62% for PID. On fees, PID is cheaper at 0.56% per year. On volatility, PID has been the lower-risk option at 2.68%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FWD or PID?

Over the 3-year period, FWD has performed better with a 29.50% return vs 12.62%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FWD or PID?

PID is cheaper with a 0.56% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for FWD.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, FWD or PID?

PID has the higher dividend yield at 3.45%, compared with 0.09% for FWD.

What is the main difference between FWD and PID?

They also come from different issuers: AllianceBernstein and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.65% for FWD and 0.56% for PID.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

PID currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.80 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.