PALC vs. TDVG

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

PALC (Pacer Lunt Large Cap Multi-Factor Alternator ETF) and TDVG (T. Rowe Price Dividend Growth ETF) are both Large Cap Growth Equities funds. PALC is passively managed, while TDVG is actively managed. Over the past 5 years, PALC returned 9.43%/yr vs 10.19%/yr for TDVG. Their correlation of 0.82 suggests significant overlap in exposure. PALC charges 0.60%/yr vs 0.50%/yr for TDVG.

Performance

PALC vs. TDVG - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Pacer Lunt Large Cap Multi-Factor Alternator ETF (PALC) and T. Rowe Price Dividend Growth ETF (TDVG). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, PALC achieves a 10.24% return, which is significantly higher than TDVG's 8.04% return.

PALC

• 1D: -2.85%
• 1M: 2.12%
• YTD: 10.24%
• 6M: 9.48%
• 1Y: 19.99%
• 3Y*: 16.40%
• 5Y*: 9.43%
• 10Y*: —

TDVG

• 1D: -0.55%
• 1M: 1.22%
• YTD: 8.04%
• 6M: 7.41%
• 1Y: 17.57%
• 3Y*: 15.55%
• 5Y*: 10.19%
• 10Y*: —

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

PALC vs. TDVG - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
PALC Pacer Lunt Large Cap Multi-Factor Alternator ETF	10.24%	7.28%	21.24%	17.52%	-14.74%	41.03%	11.91%
TDVG T. Rowe Price Dividend Growth ETF	8.04%	14.80%	13.45%	13.95%	-10.15%	26.20%	12.97%

Correlation

The correlation between PALC and TDVG 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	0.81
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.84
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 5, 2020	0.82

The correlation between PALC and TDVG has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.81 to 0.84 - a consistent structural relationship.

PALC vs. TDVG - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	PALC	TDVG
Healthcare	27.1%	12.4%
Technology	21.3%	26.2%
Industrials	15.8%	13.6%
Consumer Defensive	12.5%	6.9%
Financial Services	8.4%	19.3%
Consumer Cyclical	4.4%	7.2%
Energy	3.5%	5.3%
Basic Materials	2.4%	2.8%
Utilities	2.3%	3.8%
Communication Services	1.7%	1.0%
Real Estate	0.3%	1.6%

Return for Risk

PALC vs. TDVG — Risk / Return Rank

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

PALC

PALC Risk / Return Rank: 46
PALC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 45
PALC Sortino Ratio Rank: 43
PALC Omega Ratio Rank: 44
PALC Calmar Ratio Rank: 48
PALC Martin Ratio Rank: 51

TDVG

TDVG Risk / Return Rank: 56
TDVG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 56
TDVG Sortino Ratio Rank: 58
TDVG Omega Ratio Rank: 54
TDVG Calmar Ratio Rank: 52
TDVG Martin Ratio Rank: 59

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.

PALC vs. TDVG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Pacer Lunt Large Cap Multi-Factor Alternator ETF (PALC) and T. Rowe Price Dividend Growth ETF (TDVG). 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.

	PALC	TDVG	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.51	1.81	-0.30
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.10	2.60	-0.50
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.27	1.32	-0.05
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.25	2.44	-0.19
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	8.15	10.01	-1.86

PALC vs. TDVG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current PALC Sharpe Ratio is 1.51, which is comparable to the TDVG Sharpe Ratio of 1.81. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of PALC and TDVG, 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

PALC vs. TDVG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PALC drawdown since its inception was -24.45%, which is greater than TDVG's maximum drawdown of -19.20%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PALC and TDVG.

Drawdown Indicators

	PALC	TDVG	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-24.45%	-19.20%	-5.25%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-8.94%	-7.24%	-1.70%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-17.39%	-14.02%	-3.37%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-24.45%	-19.20%	-5.25%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.85%	-0.82%	-2.03%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-6.29%	-3.73%	-2.56%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.46%	1.76%	+0.70%

Volatility

PALC vs. TDVG - Volatility Comparison

Pacer Lunt Large Cap Multi-Factor Alternator ETF (PALC) has a higher volatility of 7.41% compared to T. Rowe Price Dividend Growth ETF (TDVG) at 2.78%. This indicates that PALC's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than TDVG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	PALC	TDVG	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	7.41%	2.78%	+4.63%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	10.87%	7.61%	+3.26%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	13.38%	9.79%	+3.59%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	16.47%	13.92%	+2.55%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	17.23%	13.90%	+3.33%

PALC vs. TDVG - Expense Ratio Comparison

PALC has a 0.60% expense ratio, which is higher than TDVG's 0.50% expense ratio.

Dividends

PALC vs. TDVG - Dividend Comparison

PALC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.06%, more than TDVG's 0.98% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
PALC Pacer Lunt Large Cap Multi-Factor Alternator ETF	1.06%	1.08%	0.93%	0.74%	1.69%	0.64%	0.72%
TDVG T. Rowe Price Dividend Growth ETF	0.98%	1.00%	1.06%	1.31%	1.15%	0.80%	0.40%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both PALC and TDVG in my portfolio?

PALC and TDVG 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, PALC or TDVG?

PALC has higher volatility (7.41%) compared to TDVG (2.78%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PALC dropped -24.45% vs TDVG's -19.20%.

Which ETF is better, PALC or TDVG?

On 5-year performance, TDVG leads with 10.19% vs 9.43% for PALC. On fees, TDVG is cheaper at 0.50% per year. On volatility, TDVG has been the lower-risk option at 2.78%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, PALC or TDVG?

Over the 5-year period, TDVG has performed better with a 10.19% return vs 9.43%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, PALC or TDVG?

TDVG is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for PALC.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, PALC or TDVG?

PALC has the higher dividend yield at 1.06%, compared with 0.98% for TDVG.

What is the main difference between PALC and TDVG?

They also come from different issuers: Pacer and T. Rowe Price. Their fees differ too: 0.60% for PALC and 0.50% for TDVG.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

TDVG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.81 vs 1.51), 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.