GGUS vs. PFM

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

GGUS (Goldman Sachs MarketBeta Russell 1000 Growth Equity ETF) and PFM (Invesco Dividend Achievers™ ETF) are both Large Cap Growth Equities funds - GGUS tracks the Russell 1000 Growth 40 Act Daily Capped Index - Benchmark TR Gross while PFM tracks the NASDAQ US Broad Dividend Achievers Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, GGUS returned 23.97% vs 19.65% for PFM. A 0.68 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. GGUS charges 0.12%/yr vs 0.53%/yr for PFM.

Performance

GGUS vs. PFM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Goldman Sachs MarketBeta Russell 1000 Growth Equity ETF (GGUS) 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, GGUS achieves a 7.56% return, which is significantly lower than PFM's 8.18% return.

GGUS

• 1D: -1.06%
• 1M: 6.20%
• YTD: 7.56%
• 6M: 7.02%
• 1Y: 23.97%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

PFM

• 1D: -0.23%
• 1M: 3.40%
• YTD: 8.18%
• 6M: 7.73%
• 1Y: 19.65%
• 3Y*: 16.31%
• 5Y*: 10.63%
• 10Y*: 11.82%

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

GGUS vs. PFM - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
GGUS Goldman Sachs MarketBeta Russell 1000 Growth Equity ETF	7.56%	17.32%	30.88%	4.54%
PFM Invesco Dividend Achievers™ ETF	8.18%	14.00%	16.87%	4.01%

Correlation

The correlation between GGUS and PFM is 0.65, 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	0.65
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 1, 2023	0.68

The correlation between GGUS and PFM has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.65 to 0.68 - a consistent structural relationship.

GGUS vs. PFM - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	GGUS	PFM
Technology	46.6%	24.7%
Consumer Cyclical	13.8%	4.0%
Communication Services	11.2%	1.1%
Healthcare	9.0%	14.9%
Industrials	7.2%	11.1%
Financial Services	6.9%	18.5%
Consumer Defensive	3.4%	12.0%
Real Estate	0.5%	2.0%
Energy	0.5%	4.7%
Basic Materials	0.4%	3.0%
Utilities	0.3%	4.2%

Return for Risk

GGUS vs. PFM — Risk / Return Rank

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

GGUS

GGUS Risk / Return Rank: 41
GGUS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 46
GGUS Sortino Ratio Rank: 44
GGUS Omega Ratio Rank: 44
GGUS Calmar Ratio Rank: 33
GGUS Martin Ratio Rank: 36

PFM

PFM Risk / Return Rank: 62
PFM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 61
PFM Sortino Ratio Rank: 66
PFM Omega Ratio Rank: 61
PFM Calmar Ratio Rank: 56
PFM Martin Ratio Rank: 63

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.

GGUS vs. PFM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Goldman Sachs MarketBeta Russell 1000 Growth Equity ETF (GGUS) 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.

	GGUS	PFM	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.61	2.09	-0.48
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.22	3.07	-0.85
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.28	1.38	-0.09
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.62	2.78	-1.17
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	5.55	11.28	-5.73
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

GGUS vs. PFM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current GGUS Sharpe Ratio is 1.61, which is comparable to the PFM Sharpe Ratio of 2.09. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of GGUS 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.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	GGUS	PFM	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.61	2.09	-0.48
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.79	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	0.78	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.30	0.53	+0.77

Drawdowns

GGUS vs. PFM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GGUS drawdown since its inception was -22.59%, smaller than the maximum PFM drawdown of -53.21%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GGUS and PFM.

Drawdown Indicators

	GGUS	PFM	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-22.59%	-53.21%	+30.62%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-14.91%	-7.09%	-7.82%
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	-1.28%	-0.23%	-1.05%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.20%	-6.94%	+3.74%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.33%	1.75%	+2.58%

Volatility

GGUS vs. PFM - Volatility Comparison

Goldman Sachs MarketBeta Russell 1000 Growth Equity ETF (GGUS) has a higher volatility of 3.41% compared to Invesco Dividend Achievers™ ETF (PFM) at 2.04%. This indicates that GGUS'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

	GGUS	PFM	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.41%	2.04%	+1.37%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	11.30%	7.13%	+4.17%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	15.00%	9.47%	+5.53%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	18.96%	13.54%	+5.42%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	18.96%	15.21%	+3.75%

GGUS vs. PFM - Expense Ratio Comparison

GGUS has a 0.12% expense ratio, which is lower than PFM's 0.53% expense ratio.

Dividends

GGUS vs. PFM - Dividend Comparison

GGUS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.41%, less than PFM's 1.33% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
GGUS Goldman Sachs MarketBeta Russell 1000 Growth Equity ETF	0.41%	0.43%	0.68%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
PFM Invesco Dividend Achievers™ ETF	1.33%	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 GGUS and PFM in my portfolio?

GGUS and PFM have a correlation of 0.65, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, GGUS or PFM?

GGUS has higher volatility (3.41%) compared to PFM (2.04%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GGUS dropped -22.59% vs PFM's -53.21%.

Which ETF is better, GGUS or PFM?

On 1-year performance, GGUS leads with 23.97% vs 19.65% for PFM. On fees, GGUS is cheaper at 0.12% per year. On volatility, PFM has been the lower-risk option at 2.04%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, GGUS or PFM?

Over the 1-year period, GGUS has performed better with a 23.97% return vs 19.65%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, GGUS or PFM?

GGUS is cheaper with a 0.12% expense ratio, compared with 0.53% for PFM.

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

PFM has the higher dividend yield at 1.33%, compared with 0.41% for GGUS.

What is the main difference between GGUS and PFM?

GGUS tracks Russell 1000 Growth 40 Act Daily Capped Index - Benchmark TR Gross, while PFM tracks NASDAQ US Broad Dividend Achievers Index. They also come from different issuers: Goldman Sachs and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.12% for GGUS and 0.53% for PFM.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

PFM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.09 vs 1.61), 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.