PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
LCLG vs. PFM
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

LCLG vs. PFM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Logan Capital Broad Innovative Growth ETF (LCLG) and Invesco Dividend Achievers™ ETF (PFM). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, LCLG achieves a 16.37% return, which is significantly higher than PFM's 7.31% return.


LCLG

1D
0.17%
1M
4.33%
YTD
16.37%
6M
13.84%
1Y
33.78%
3Y*
28.01%
5Y*
10Y*

PFM

1D
-0.11%
1M
0.00%
YTD
7.31%
6M
6.16%
1Y
16.73%
3Y*
15.60%
5Y*
10.57%
10Y*
11.75%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

LCLG vs. PFM - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)2025202420232022
LCLG
Logan Capital Broad Innovative Growth ETF
16.37%18.15%32.04%35.45%-8.62%
PFM
Invesco Dividend Achievers™ ETF
7.31%14.00%16.87%11.40%0.81%

Correlation

The correlation between LCLG and PFM is 0.70, 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

0.70

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.75

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 8, 2022

0.79

The correlation between LCLG and PFM has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.70 to 0.79 - a consistent structural relationship.

LCLG vs. PFM - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
LCLG
PFM

Technology

38.0%
27.6%

Communication Services

18.8%
1.1%

Industrials

17.5%
10.7%

Consumer Cyclical

15.3%
3.7%

Financial Services

5.8%
17.9%

Healthcare

2.7%
15.1%

Consumer Defensive

1.1%
11.1%

Basic Materials

0.9%
2.8%

Energy

-

4.3%

Real Estate

-

2.0%

Utilities

-

3.9%

Technology

LCLG
38.0%
PFM
27.6%

Communication Services

LCLG
18.8%
PFM
1.1%

Industrials

LCLG
17.5%
PFM
10.7%

Consumer Cyclical

LCLG
15.3%
PFM
3.7%

Financial Services

LCLG
5.8%
PFM
17.9%

Healthcare

LCLG
2.7%
PFM
15.1%

Consumer Defensive

LCLG
1.1%
PFM
11.1%

Basic Materials

LCLG
0.9%
PFM
2.8%

Energy

LCLG

-

PFM
4.3%

Real Estate

LCLG

-

PFM
2.0%

Utilities

LCLG

-

PFM
3.9%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.


Return for Risk

LCLG vs. PFM — Risk / Return Rank

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

LCLG
LCLG Risk / Return Rank: 5858
Overall Rank
LCLG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6060
Sharpe Ratio Rank
LCLG Sortino Ratio Rank: 5656
Sortino Ratio Rank
LCLG Omega Ratio Rank: 5555
Omega Ratio Rank
LCLG Calmar Ratio Rank: 5757
Calmar Ratio Rank
LCLG Martin Ratio Rank: 6363
Martin Ratio Rank

PFM
PFM Risk / Return Rank: 5959
Overall Rank
PFM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6060
Sharpe Ratio Rank
PFM Sortino Ratio Rank: 6464
Sortino Ratio Rank
PFM Omega Ratio Rank: 5959
Omega Ratio Rank
PFM Calmar Ratio Rank: 5454
Calmar Ratio Rank
PFM Martin Ratio Rank: 6060
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

LCLG vs. PFM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Logan Capital Broad Innovative Growth ETF (LCLG) 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.


LCLGPFMDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.04

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.26

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.30

1.32

-0.02

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.47

2.37

+0.10

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

9.83

9.58

+0.24

LCLG vs. PFM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current LCLG Sharpe Ratio is 1.74, which is comparable to the PFM Sharpe Ratio of 1.78. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of LCLG 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.


Loading charts...

Drawdowns

LCLG vs. PFM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum LCLG drawdown since its inception was -25.79%, smaller than the maximum PFM drawdown of -53.21%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LCLG and PFM.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


LCLGPFMDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-25.79%

-53.21%

+27.42%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-13.75%

-7.09%

-6.66%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-25.79%

-14.50%

-11.29%

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

-2.60%

-1.12%

-1.48%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-4.45%

-6.93%

+2.48%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.45%

1.75%

+1.70%

Volatility

LCLG vs. PFM - Volatility Comparison

Logan Capital Broad Innovative Growth ETF (LCLG) has a higher volatility of 8.00% compared to Invesco Dividend Achievers™ ETF (PFM) at 2.35%. This indicates that LCLG'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.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


LCLGPFMDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

8.00%

2.35%

+5.65%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

15.89%

7.19%

+8.70%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

19.60%

9.49%

+10.11%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

21.74%

13.51%

+8.23%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

21.74%

15.20%

+6.54%

LCLG vs. PFM - Expense Ratio Comparison

LCLG has a 0.99% expense ratio, which is higher than PFM's 0.53% expense ratio.


Dividends

LCLG vs. PFM - Dividend Comparison

LCLG has not paid dividends to shareholders, while PFM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.36%.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
LCLG
Logan Capital Broad Innovative Growth ETF
0.00%0.00%0.06%0.97%2.03%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
PFM
Invesco Dividend Achievers™ ETF
1.36%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


LCLG and PFM have a correlation of 0.70, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

LCLG has higher volatility (8.00%) compared to PFM (2.35%). In terms of maximum drawdown, LCLG dropped -25.79% vs PFM's -53.21%.

On 3-year performance, LCLG leads with 28.01% vs 15.60% for PFM. On fees, PFM is cheaper at 0.53% per year. On volatility, PFM has been the lower-risk option at 2.35%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 3-year period, LCLG has performed better with a 28.01% return vs 15.60%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

PFM is cheaper with a 0.53% expense ratio, compared with 0.99% for LCLG.

PFM has the higher dividend yield at 1.36%, compared with 0.00% for LCLG.

They also come from different issuers: Logan and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.99% for LCLG and 0.53% for PFM.

PFM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.78 vs 1.74), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for LCLG and PFM

Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.

Open Portfolio Optimizer