ILCG vs. PFM

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

ILCG (iShares Morningstar Growth ETF) and PFM (Invesco Dividend Achievers™ ETF) are both Large Cap Growth Equities funds - ILCG tracks the Morningstar US Large-Mid Cap Broad Growth Index Gross while PFM tracks the NASDAQ US Broad Dividend Achievers Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, ILCG returned 18.15%/yr vs 11.82%/yr for PFM. A 0.78 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. ILCG charges 0.04%/yr vs 0.53%/yr for PFM.

Performance

ILCG vs. PFM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares Morningstar Growth ETF (ILCG) 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, ILCG achieves a 14.48% return, which is significantly higher than PFM's 8.18% return. Over the past 10 years, ILCG has outperformed PFM with an annualized return of 18.15%, while PFM has yielded a comparatively lower 11.82% annualized return.

ILCG

• 1D: -1.02%
• 1M: 7.68%
• YTD: 14.48%
• 6M: 14.61%
• 1Y: 29.51%
• 3Y*: 26.55%
• 5Y*: 14.95%
• 10Y*: 18.15%

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)

ILCG vs. PFM - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
ILCG iShares Morningstar Growth ETF	14.48%	16.71%	32.82%	40.41%	-31.75%	24.33%	38.56%	33.22%	2.06%	30.57%
PFM Invesco Dividend Achievers™ ETF	8.18%	14.00%	16.87%	11.40%	-6.22%	23.08%	9.53%	26.88%	-4.58%	17.65%

Correlation

The correlation between ILCG and PFM is 0.61, 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	0.61
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.65
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.73
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.73
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 16, 2005	0.78

The correlation between ILCG and PFM shifts across timeframes, from 0.61 (1 year) to 0.78 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

ILCG vs. PFM - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	ILCG	PFM
Technology	49.8%	24.7%
Communication Services	14.5%	1.1%
Consumer Cyclical	10.6%	4.0%
Industrials	8.3%	11.1%
Financial Services	6.0%	18.5%
Healthcare	5.3%	14.9%
Consumer Defensive	1.6%	12.0%
Real Estate	1.4%	2.0%
Basic Materials	1.1%	3.0%
Utilities	0.8%	4.2%
Energy	0.5%	4.7%

Return for Risk

ILCG vs. PFM — Risk / Return Rank

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

ILCG

ILCG Risk / Return Rank: 46
ILCG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 52
ILCG Sortino Ratio Rank: 49
ILCG Omega Ratio Rank: 50
ILCG Calmar Ratio Rank: 38
ILCG Martin Ratio Rank: 41

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.

ILCG vs. PFM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Morningstar Growth ETF (ILCG) 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.

	ILCG	PFM	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.82	2.09	-0.27
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.45	3.07	-0.62
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.32	1.38	-0.06
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.89	2.78	-0.89
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	6.68	11.28	-4.60
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

ILCG vs. PFM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ILCG Sharpe Ratio is 1.82, which is comparable to the PFM Sharpe Ratio of 2.09. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ILCG 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

	ILCG	PFM	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.82	2.09	-0.27
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.68	0.79	-0.11
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.85	0.78	+0.07
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.59	0.53	+0.06

Drawdowns

ILCG vs. PFM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ILCG drawdown since its inception was -52.98%, roughly equal to the maximum PFM drawdown of -53.21%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ILCG and PFM.

Drawdown Indicators

	ILCG	PFM	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-52.98%	-53.21%	+0.23%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-15.65%	-7.09%	-8.56%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-23.10%	-14.50%	-8.60%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-35.38%	-17.81%	-17.57%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-35.38%	-32.22%	-3.16%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.02%	-0.23%	-0.79%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-8.22%	-6.94%	-1.28%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.43%	1.75%	+2.68%

Volatility

ILCG vs. PFM - Volatility Comparison

iShares Morningstar Growth ETF (ILCG) has a higher volatility of 4.40% compared to Invesco Dividend Achievers™ ETF (PFM) at 2.04%. This indicates that ILCG'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

	ILCG	PFM	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.40%	2.04%	+2.36%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	12.81%	7.13%	+5.68%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	16.31%	9.47%	+6.84%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	22.00%	13.54%	+8.46%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	21.53%	15.21%	+6.32%

ILCG vs. PFM - Expense Ratio Comparison

ILCG has a 0.04% expense ratio, which is lower than PFM's 0.53% expense ratio.

Dividends

ILCG vs. PFM - Dividend Comparison

ILCG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.40%, less than PFM's 1.33% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
ILCG iShares Morningstar Growth ETF	0.40%	0.47%	0.50%	0.69%	0.75%	0.34%	0.28%	0.54%	0.81%	0.89%	0.95%	0.99%
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 ILCG and PFM in my portfolio?

ILCG and PFM have a correlation of 0.61, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, ILCG or PFM?

ILCG has higher volatility (4.40%) compared to PFM (2.04%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ILCG dropped -52.98% vs PFM's -53.21%.

Which ETF is better, ILCG or PFM?

On 10-year performance, ILCG leads with 18.15% vs 11.82% for PFM. On fees, ILCG is cheaper at 0.04% 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, ILCG or PFM?

Over the 10-year period, ILCG has performed better with a 18.15% return vs 11.82%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, ILCG or PFM?

ILCG is cheaper with a 0.04% expense ratio, compared with 0.53% for PFM.

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

PFM has the higher dividend yield at 1.33%, compared with 0.40% for ILCG.

What is the main difference between ILCG and PFM?

ILCG tracks Morningstar US Large-Mid Cap Broad Growth Index Gross, while PFM tracks NASDAQ US Broad Dividend Achievers Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.04% for ILCG and 0.53% for PFM.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

PFM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.09 vs 1.82), 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.