LEAD vs. PFM

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

LEAD (Siren DIVCON Leaders Dividend ETF) and PFM (Invesco Dividend Achievers™ ETF) are both Large Cap Growth Equities funds - LEAD tracks the Siren DIVCON Leaders Dividend Index while PFM tracks the NASDAQ US Broad Dividend Achievers Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, LEAD returned 14.71%/yr vs 11.82%/yr for PFM. Their correlation of 0.83 suggests significant overlap in exposure. LEAD charges 0.43%/yr vs 0.53%/yr for PFM.

Performance

LEAD vs. PFM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Siren DIVCON Leaders Dividend ETF (LEAD) 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, LEAD achieves a 15.75% return, which is significantly higher than PFM's 8.18% return. Over the past 10 years, LEAD has outperformed PFM with an annualized return of 14.71%, while PFM has yielded a comparatively lower 11.82% annualized return.

LEAD

• 1D: 0.48%
• 1M: 4.84%
• YTD: 15.75%
• 6M: 14.25%
• 1Y: 25.56%
• 3Y*: 19.23%
• 5Y*: 12.16%
• 10Y*: 14.71%

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)

LEAD vs. PFM - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
LEAD Siren DIVCON Leaders Dividend ETF	15.75%	15.52%	10.32%	26.25%	-18.16%	29.69%	23.41%	33.75%	-6.63%	24.89%
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 LEAD and PFM is 0.82, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.82
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.88
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.89
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.85
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 7, 2016	0.83

The correlation between LEAD and PFM has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.82 to 0.89 - a consistent structural relationship.

LEAD vs. PFM - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	LEAD	PFM
Technology	36.5%	24.7%
Industrials	31.1%	11.1%
Financial Services	16.2%	18.5%
Healthcare	5.7%	14.9%
Consumer Defensive	3.8%	12.0%
Consumer Cyclical	1.3%	4.0%
Energy	1.3%	4.7%
Communication Services	0.1%	1.1%
Basic Materials	-	3.0%
Real Estate	-	2.0%
Utilities	-	4.2%

Return for Risk

LEAD vs. PFM — Risk / Return Rank

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

LEAD

LEAD Risk / Return Rank: 56
LEAD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 51
LEAD Sortino Ratio Rank: 51
LEAD Omega Ratio Rank: 49
LEAD Calmar Ratio Rank: 60
LEAD Martin Ratio Rank: 69

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.

LEAD vs. PFM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Siren DIVCON Leaders Dividend ETF (LEAD) 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.

	LEAD	PFM	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.77	2.09	-0.32
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.47	3.07	-0.60
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.31	1.38	-0.07
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.97	2.78	+0.19
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	12.66	11.28	+1.38
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

LEAD vs. PFM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current LEAD Sharpe Ratio is 1.77, which is comparable to the PFM Sharpe Ratio of 2.09. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of LEAD 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

	LEAD	PFM	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.77	2.09	-0.32
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.71	0.79	-0.08
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.79	0.78	+0.01
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.80	0.53	+0.28

Drawdowns

LEAD vs. PFM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum LEAD drawdown since its inception was -32.19%, smaller than the maximum PFM drawdown of -53.21%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LEAD and PFM.

Drawdown Indicators

	LEAD	PFM	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-32.19%	-53.21%	+21.02%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-8.65%	-7.09%	-1.56%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-17.86%	-14.50%	-3.36%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-24.93%	-17.81%	-7.12%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-32.19%	-32.22%	+0.03%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	-0.23%	+0.23%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-4.42%	-6.94%	+2.52%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.02%	1.75%	+0.27%

Volatility

LEAD vs. PFM - Volatility Comparison

Siren DIVCON Leaders Dividend ETF (LEAD) has a higher volatility of 4.12% compared to Invesco Dividend Achievers™ ETF (PFM) at 2.04%. This indicates that LEAD'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

	LEAD	PFM	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.12%	2.04%	+2.08%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	11.33%	7.13%	+4.20%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	14.56%	9.47%	+5.09%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	17.34%	13.54%	+3.80%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	18.65%	15.21%	+3.44%

LEAD vs. PFM - Expense Ratio Comparison

LEAD has a 0.43% expense ratio, which is lower than PFM's 0.53% expense ratio.

Dividends

LEAD vs. PFM - Dividend Comparison

LEAD's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.58%, less than PFM's 1.33% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
LEAD Siren DIVCON Leaders Dividend ETF	0.58%	0.70%	0.93%	1.13%	1.27%	1.79%	0.81%	1.32%	1.38%	0.97%	1.38%	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 LEAD and PFM in my portfolio?

LEAD and PFM have a correlation of 0.82, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, LEAD or PFM?

LEAD has higher volatility (4.12%) compared to PFM (2.04%). In terms of maximum drawdown, LEAD dropped -32.19% vs PFM's -53.21%.

Which ETF is better, LEAD or PFM?

On 10-year performance, LEAD leads with 14.71% vs 11.82% for PFM. On fees, LEAD is cheaper at 0.43% 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, LEAD or PFM?

Over the 10-year period, LEAD has performed better with a 14.71% return vs 11.82%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, LEAD or PFM?

LEAD is cheaper with a 0.43% expense ratio, compared with 0.53% for PFM.

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

PFM has the higher dividend yield at 1.33%, compared with 0.58% for LEAD.

What is the main difference between LEAD and PFM?

LEAD tracks Siren DIVCON Leaders Dividend Index, while PFM tracks NASDAQ US Broad Dividend Achievers Index. They also come from different issuers: SRN Advisors and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.43% for LEAD and 0.53% for PFM.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

PFM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.09 vs 1.77), 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.