PFM vs. ACGR
PFM (Invesco Dividend Achievers™ ETF) and ACGR (American Century Large Cap Growth ETF) are both Large Cap Growth Equities funds - PFM tracks the NASDAQ US Broad Dividend Achievers Index while ACGR tracks the Russell 1000 Growth Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, PFM returned 10.63%/yr vs 15.06%/yr for ACGR. A 0.62 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. PFM charges 0.53%/yr vs 0.39%/yr for ACGR.
Performance
PFM vs. ACGR - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, PFM achieves a 8.18% return, which is significantly higher than ACGR's 7.39% return.
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%
ACGR
- 1D
- -1.23%
- 1M
- 6.10%
- YTD
- 7.39%
- 6M
- 6.90%
- 1Y
- 24.19%
- 3Y*
- 21.44%
- 5Y*
- 15.06%
- 10Y*
- —
PFM vs. ACGR - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
PFM Invesco Dividend Achievers™ ETF | 8.18% | 14.00% | 16.87% | 11.40% | -6.22% | 23.08% | 7.05% |
ACGR American Century Large Cap Growth ETF | 7.39% | 14.50% | 26.66% | 43.24% | -30.13% | 39.24% | 11.27% |
Correlation
The correlation between PFM and ACGR is 0.59, 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 | 0.59 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.64 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.72 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 22, 2020 | 0.62 |
The correlation between PFM and ACGR shifts across timeframes, from 0.59 (1 year) to 0.72 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
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
PFM vs. ACGR — Risk / Return Rank
PFM
ACGR
PFM vs. ACGR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco Dividend Achievers™ ETF (PFM) and American Century Large Cap Growth ETF (ACGR). 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.
| PFM | ACGR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.52 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.90 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.38 | 1.27 | +0.11 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.78 | 1.53 | +1.25 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 11.28 | 5.20 | +6.08 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| PFM | ACGR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.09 | 1.57 | +0.52 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.79 | 0.70 | +0.09 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.78 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.53 | 0.70 | -0.17 |
Drawdowns
PFM vs. ACGR - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum PFM drawdown since its inception was -53.21%, which is greater than ACGR's maximum drawdown of -34.54%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PFM and ACGR.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| PFM | ACGR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -53.21% | -34.54% | -18.67% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -7.09% | -15.84% | +8.75% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -14.50% | -24.58% | +10.08% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -17.81% | -34.54% | +16.73% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -32.22% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.23% | -1.68% | +1.45% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -6.94% | -8.50% | +1.56% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.75% | 4.66% | -2.91% |
Volatility
PFM vs. ACGR - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Invesco Dividend Achievers™ ETF (PFM) is 2.04%, while American Century Large Cap Growth ETF (ACGR) has a volatility of 3.65%. This indicates that PFM experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than ACGR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| PFM | ACGR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 2.04% | 3.65% | -1.61% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 7.13% | 11.95% | -4.82% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 9.47% | 15.49% | -6.02% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 13.54% | 21.51% | -7.97% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 15.21% | 21.42% | -6.21% |
PFM vs. ACGR - Expense Ratio Comparison
PFM has a 0.53% expense ratio, which is higher than ACGR's 0.39% expense ratio.
Dividends
PFM vs. ACGR - Dividend Comparison
PFM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.33%, more than ACGR's 0.09% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ACGR American Century Large Cap Growth ETF | 0.09% | 0.11% | 0.23% | 0.37% | 0.48% | 0.58% | 1.44% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 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
PFM and ACGR have a correlation of 0.59, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
ACGR has higher volatility (3.65%) compared to PFM (2.04%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PFM dropped -53.21% vs ACGR's -34.54%.
On 5-year performance, ACGR leads with 15.06% vs 10.63% for PFM. On fees, ACGR is cheaper at 0.39% 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.
Over the 5-year period, ACGR has performed better with a 15.06% return vs 10.63%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
ACGR is cheaper with a 0.39% expense ratio, compared with 0.53% for PFM.
PFM has the higher dividend yield at 1.33%, compared with 0.09% for ACGR.
PFM tracks NASDAQ US Broad Dividend Achievers Index, while ACGR tracks Russell 1000 Growth Index. They also come from different issuers: Invesco and American Century. Their fees differ too: 0.53% for PFM and 0.39% for ACGR.
PFM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.09 vs 1.57), 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.
Find the right allocation for PFM and ACGR
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