PDN vs. CGV

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

PDN (Invesco FTSE RAFI Developed Markets ex-U.S. Small-Mid ETF) and CGV (Conductor Global Equity Value ETF) are both Foreign Small & Mid Cap Equities funds. PDN is passively managed, while CGV is actively managed. Over the past 3 years, PDN returned 17.73%/yr vs 11.34%/yr for CGV. Their correlation of 0.84 suggests significant overlap in exposure. PDN charges 0.49%/yr vs 1.25%/yr for CGV.

Performance

PDN vs. CGV - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Invesco FTSE RAFI Developed Markets ex-U.S. Small-Mid ETF (PDN) and Conductor Global Equity Value ETF (CGV). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both investments are quite close, with PDN having a 7.41% return and CGV slightly higher at 7.53%.

PDN

• 1D: -2.19%
• 1M: -3.17%
• YTD: 7.41%
• 6M: 7.22%
• 1Y: 22.25%
• 3Y*: 17.73%
• 5Y*: 6.30%
• 10Y*: 8.78%

CGV

• 1D: -1.57%
• 1M: -3.07%
• YTD: 7.53%
• 6M: 6.77%
• 1Y: 21.28%
• 3Y*: 11.34%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

PDN vs. CGV - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
PDN Invesco FTSE RAFI Developed Markets ex-U.S. Small-Mid ETF	7.41%	38.34%	0.57%	13.35%	-2.43%
CGV Conductor Global Equity Value ETF	7.53%	23.11%	-3.34%	5.72%	3.64%

Correlation

The correlation between PDN and CGV is 0.87, 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	0.87
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.88
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 1, 2022	0.84

The correlation between PDN and CGV has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.84 to 0.88 - a consistent structural relationship.

PDN vs. CGV - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	PDN	CGV
Industrials	23.2%	14.3%
Financial Services	12.7%	5.2%
Consumer Cyclical	11.7%	10.3%
Basic Materials	10.5%	21.2%
Technology	10.1%	11.7%
Real Estate	8.7%	1.2%
Healthcare	5.7%	4.2%
Consumer Defensive	5.3%	12.6%
Energy	4.8%	11.7%
Communication Services	4.5%	3.6%
Utilities	2.7%	4.0%

Return for Risk

PDN vs. CGV — Risk / Return Rank

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

PDN

PDN Risk / Return Rank: 44
PDN Sharpe Ratio Rank: 44
PDN Sortino Ratio Rank: 44
PDN Omega Ratio Rank: 44
PDN Calmar Ratio Rank: 42
PDN Martin Ratio Rank: 47

CGV

CGV Risk / Return Rank: 42
CGV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 45
CGV Sortino Ratio Rank: 42
CGV Omega Ratio Rank: 43
CGV Calmar Ratio Rank: 38
CGV Martin Ratio Rank: 40

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.

PDN vs. CGV - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco FTSE RAFI Developed Markets ex-U.S. Small-Mid ETF (PDN) and Conductor Global Equity Value ETF (CGV). 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.

	PDN	CGV	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.46	1.44	+0.01
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.08	1.97	+0.10
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.27	1.26	+0.01
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.99	1.76	+0.22
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	7.45	5.96	+1.48

PDN vs. CGV - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current PDN Sharpe Ratio is 1.46, which is comparable to the CGV Sharpe Ratio of 1.44. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of PDN and CGV, 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

PDN vs. CGV - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PDN drawdown since its inception was -59.32%, which is greater than CGV's maximum drawdown of -16.64%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PDN and CGV.

Drawdown Indicators

	PDN	CGV	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-59.32%	-16.64%	-42.68%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-11.26%	-12.13%	+0.87%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-13.25%	-16.64%	+3.39%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-33.68%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-41.94%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-5.11%	-7.59%	+2.48%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-11.57%	-3.67%	-7.90%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.99%	3.58%	-0.59%

Volatility

PDN vs. CGV - Volatility Comparison

Invesco FTSE RAFI Developed Markets ex-U.S. Small-Mid ETF (PDN) and Conductor Global Equity Value ETF (CGV) have volatilities of 5.67% and 5.95%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	PDN	CGV	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.67%	5.95%	-0.28%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	13.10%	12.72%	+0.38%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	15.37%	14.84%	+0.53%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	16.47%	13.68%	+2.79%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	16.96%	13.68%	+3.28%

PDN vs. CGV - Expense Ratio Comparison

PDN has a 0.49% expense ratio, which is lower than CGV's 1.25% expense ratio.

Dividends

PDN vs. CGV - Dividend Comparison

PDN's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.32%, less than CGV's 5.10% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
CGV Conductor Global Equity Value ETF	5.10%	4.58%	2.87%	4.56%	0.71%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
PDN Invesco FTSE RAFI Developed Markets ex-U.S. Small-Mid ETF	3.32%	3.36%	3.36%	3.16%	2.68%	2.42%	1.79%	2.60%	2.21%	2.42%	2.16%	2.06%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both PDN and CGV in my portfolio?

PDN and CGV have a correlation of 0.87, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, PDN or CGV?

CGV has higher volatility (5.95%) compared to PDN (5.67%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PDN dropped -59.32% vs CGV's -16.64%.

Which ETF is better, PDN or CGV?

On 3-year performance, PDN leads with 17.73% vs 11.34% for CGV. On fees, PDN is cheaper at 0.49% per year. On volatility, PDN has been the lower-risk option at 5.67%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, PDN or CGV?

Over the 3-year period, PDN has performed better with a 17.73% return vs 11.34%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, PDN or CGV?

PDN is cheaper with a 0.49% expense ratio, compared with 1.25% for CGV.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, PDN or CGV?

CGV has the higher dividend yield at 5.10%, compared with 3.32% for PDN.

What is the main difference between PDN and CGV?

They also come from different issuers: Invesco and Conductor Fund. Their fees differ too: 0.49% for PDN and 1.25% for CGV.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

PDN currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.46 vs 1.44), 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.