HFGO vs. PFM

Last updated Aug 4, 2026

HFGO (Hartford Large Cap Growth ETF) and PFM (Invesco Dividend Achievers™ ETF) are both Large Cap Growth Equities funds. HFGO is actively managed, while PFM is passively managed. Over the past 3 years, HFGO returned 23.35%/yr vs 15.73%/yr for PFM. Their 0.65 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. HFGO charges 0.60%/yr vs 0.53%/yr for PFM.

Performance

HFGO vs. PFM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Hartford Large Cap Growth ETF (HFGO) 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, HFGO achieves a 5.49% return, which is significantly lower than PFM's 10.65% return.

HFGO

• 1D: 2.49%
• 1M: -0.31%
• 6M: 8.43%
• YTD: 5.49%
• 1Y: 14.20%
• 3Y*: 23.35%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 8.01%

PFM

• 1D: 0.31%
• 1M: 1.14%
• 6M: 7.03%
• YTD: 10.65%
• 1Y: 19.46%
• 3Y*: 15.73%
• 5Y*: 10.76%
• 10Y*: 11.56%
• ALL TIME*: 8.78%

*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)
HFGO Hartford Large Cap Growth ETF	$551.12K	$771.71K	$1.12M
PFM Invesco Dividend Achievers™ ETF	$789.97K	$827.49K	$977.52K

HFGO vs. PFM - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
HFGO Hartford Large Cap Growth ETF	5.49%	15.52%	40.73%	42.45%	-36.69%	-6.95%
PFM Invesco Dividend Achievers™ ETF	10.65%	14.00%	16.87%	11.40%	-6.22%	2.86%

Correlation

The correlation between HFGO and PFM is 0.47, which is low. Their historical price movements had little consistent relationship.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.47
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history.	0.56
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 10, 2021	0.65

The correlation between HFGO and PFM shifts across timeframes, from 0.47 (1 year) to 0.65 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

HFGO vs. PFM - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	HFGO	PFM
Technology	59.7%	23.4%
Communication Services	17.6%	1.0%
Consumer Cyclical	7.8%	4.0%
Healthcare	7.0%	16.6%
Industrials	4.0%	11.6%
Financial Services	2.1%	19.0%
Basic Materials	1.0%	3.0%
Consumer Defensive	0.5%	11.3%
Energy	0.5%	4.2%
Real Estate	-	2.0%
Utilities	-	4.1%

Return for Risk

HFGO vs. PFM — Risk / Return Rank

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

HFGO

HFGO Risk / Return Rank: 27
HFGO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 28
HFGO Sortino Ratio Rank: 28
HFGO Omega Ratio Rank: 27
HFGO Calmar Ratio Rank: 25
HFGO Martin Ratio Rank: 27

PFM

PFM Risk / Return Rank: 82
PFM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 85
PFM Sortino Ratio Rank: 87
PFM Omega Ratio Rank: 84
PFM Calmar Ratio Rank: 75
PFM Martin Ratio Rank: 81

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.

HFGO vs. PFM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Hartford Large Cap Growth ETF (HFGO) 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.

	HFGO	PFM	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.70	2.07	-1.37
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.08	3.01	-1.93
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.13	1.38	-0.25
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.78	2.75	-1.98
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	2.24	11.27	-9.03

HFGO vs. PFM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current HFGO Sharpe Ratio is 0.70, which is lower than the PFM Sharpe Ratio of 2.07. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of HFGO 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

HFGO vs. PFM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum HFGO drawdown since its inception was -44.64%, smaller than the maximum PFM drawdown of -53.21%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for HFGO and PFM.

Drawdown Indicators

	HFGO	PFM	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-44.64%	-53.21%	+8.57%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-18.29%	-7.09%	-11.20%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-25.19%	-14.50%	-10.69%
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	-6.73%	-0.70%	-6.03%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-15.78%	-6.89%	-8.89%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	6.35%	1.73%	+4.62%

Volatility

HFGO vs. PFM - Volatility Comparison

Hartford Large Cap Growth ETF (HFGO) has a higher volatility of 7.42% compared to Invesco Dividend Achievers™ ETF (PFM) at 2.43%. This indicates that HFGO'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

	HFGO	PFM	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	7.42%	2.43%	+4.99%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	16.70%	7.12%	+9.58%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	20.49%	9.46%	+11.03%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	25.96%	13.47%	+12.49%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	25.96%	15.19%	+10.77%

HFGO vs. PFM - Expense Ratio Comparison

HFGO has a 0.60% expense ratio, which is higher than PFM's 0.53% expense ratio.

Dividends

HFGO vs. PFM - Dividend Comparison

HFGO has not paid dividends to shareholders, while PFM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.32%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
HFGO Hartford Large Cap Growth ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
PFM Invesco Dividend Achievers™ ETF	1.32%	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 HFGO and PFM in my portfolio?

HFGO 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, HFGO or PFM?

HFGO has higher volatility (7.42%) compared to PFM (2.43%). In terms of maximum drawdown, HFGO dropped -44.64% vs PFM's -53.21%.

Which ETF is better, HFGO or PFM?

On 3-year performance, HFGO leads with 23.35% vs 15.73% for PFM. On fees, PFM is cheaper at 0.53% per year. On volatility, PFM has been the lower-risk option at 2.43%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, HFGO or PFM?

Over the 3-year period, HFGO has performed better with a 23.35% return vs 15.73%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, HFGO or PFM?

PFM is cheaper with a 0.53% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for HFGO.

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

PFM has the higher dividend yield at 1.32%, compared with 0.00% for HFGO.

What is the main difference between HFGO and PFM?

They also come from different issuers: Hartford and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.60% for HFGO and 0.53% for PFM.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

PFM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.07 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.