PFM vs. DARP
PFM (Invesco Dividend Achievers™ ETF) and DARP (Grizzle Growth ETF) are both Large Cap Growth Equities funds. PFM is passively managed, while DARP is actively managed. Over the past year, PFM returned 19.65% vs 82.62% for DARP. A 0.52 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. PFM charges 0.53%/yr vs 0.75%/yr for DARP.
Performance
PFM vs. DARP - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, PFM achieves a 8.18% return, which is significantly lower than DARP's 32.67% 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%
DARP
- 1D
- -0.76%
- 1M
- 8.18%
- YTD
- 32.67%
- 6M
- 34.22%
- 1Y
- 82.62%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
PFM vs. DARP - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
PFM Invesco Dividend Achievers™ ETF | 8.18% | 14.00% | 16.87% | 5.93% |
DARP Grizzle Growth ETF | 32.67% | 40.19% | 24.63% | 6.25% |
Correlation
The correlation between PFM and DARP is 0.47, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.47 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 29, 2023 | 0.52 |
The correlation between PFM and DARP has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.47 to 0.52 - a consistent structural relationship.
PFM vs. DARP - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
PFM
DARP
Technology
Financial Services
-
Healthcare
Consumer Defensive
-
Industrials
Energy
Utilities
Consumer Cyclical
Basic Materials
Real Estate
-
Communication Services
Technology
PFM
DARP
Financial Services
PFM
DARP
-
Healthcare
PFM
DARP
Consumer Defensive
PFM
DARP
-
Industrials
PFM
DARP
Energy
PFM
DARP
Utilities
PFM
DARP
Consumer Cyclical
PFM
DARP
Basic Materials
PFM
DARP
Real Estate
PFM
DARP
-
Communication Services
PFM
DARP
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. DARP — Risk / Return Rank
PFM
DARP
PFM vs. DARP - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco Dividend Achievers™ ETF (PFM) and Grizzle Growth ETF (DARP). 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 | DARP | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -1.50 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.96 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.38 | 1.54 | -0.17 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.78 | 7.03 | -4.25 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 11.28 | 26.75 | -15.47 |
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 | DARP | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.09 | 3.59 | -1.50 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.79 | — | — |
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 | 1.49 | -0.96 |
Drawdowns
PFM vs. DARP - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum PFM drawdown since its inception was -53.21%, which is greater than DARP's maximum drawdown of -30.27%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PFM and DARP.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| PFM | DARP | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -53.21% | -30.27% | -22.94% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -7.09% | -11.82% | +4.73% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -14.50% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -17.81% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -32.22% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.23% | -0.76% | +0.53% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -6.94% | -4.64% | -2.30% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.75% | 3.10% | -1.35% |
Volatility
PFM vs. DARP - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Invesco Dividend Achievers™ ETF (PFM) is 2.04%, while Grizzle Growth ETF (DARP) has a volatility of 7.07%. This indicates that PFM experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than DARP based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| PFM | DARP | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 2.04% | 7.07% | -5.03% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 7.13% | 17.49% | -10.36% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 9.47% | 23.16% | -13.69% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 13.54% | 26.11% | -12.57% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 15.21% | 26.11% | -10.90% |
PFM vs. DARP - Expense Ratio Comparison
PFM has a 0.53% expense ratio, which is lower than DARP's 0.75% expense ratio.
Dividends
PFM vs. DARP - Dividend Comparison
PFM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.33%, more than DARP's 0.33% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
DARP Grizzle Growth ETF | 0.33% | 0.43% | 1.93% | 0.32% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 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 DARP have a correlation of 0.47, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
DARP has higher volatility (7.07%) compared to PFM (2.04%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PFM dropped -53.21% vs DARP's -30.27%.
On 1-year performance, DARP leads with 82.62% vs 19.65% for PFM. On fees, PFM is cheaper at 0.53% 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 1-year period, DARP has performed better with a 82.62% return vs 19.65%. 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 0.75% for DARP.
PFM has the higher dividend yield at 1.33%, compared with 0.33% for DARP.
They also come from different issuers: Invesco and Grizzle. Their fees differ too: 0.53% for PFM and 0.75% for DARP.
DARP currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.59 vs 2.09), 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 DARP
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