PFM vs. GQGU
PFM (Invesco Dividend Achievers™ ETF) and GQGU (GQG US Equity ETF) are both Large Cap Growth Equities funds. PFM is passively managed, while GQGU is actively managed. At a 0.26 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. PFM charges 0.53%/yr vs 0.49%/yr for GQGU.
Performance
PFM vs. GQGU - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, PFM achieves a 8.18% return, which is significantly higher than GQGU's 6.60% 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%
GQGU
- 1D
- -1.06%
- 1M
- -1.65%
- YTD
- 6.60%
- 6M
- 7.16%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
PFM vs. GQGU - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
PFM Invesco Dividend Achievers™ ETF | 8.18% | 6.81% |
GQGU GQG US Equity ETF | 6.60% | -1.14% |
Correlation
The correlation between PFM and GQGU is 0.26, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 15, 2025 | 0.26 |
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. GQGU — Risk / Return Rank
PFM
GQGU
PFM vs. GQGU - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco Dividend Achievers™ ETF (PFM) and GQG US Equity ETF (GQGU). 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 | GQGU | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.38 | — | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.78 | — | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 11.28 | — | — |
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 | GQGU | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.09 | — | — |
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 | 0.60 | -0.07 |
Drawdowns
PFM vs. GQGU - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum PFM drawdown since its inception was -53.21%, which is greater than GQGU's maximum drawdown of -6.65%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PFM and GQGU.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| PFM | GQGU | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -53.21% | -6.65% | -46.56% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -7.09% | — | — |
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% | -4.66% | +4.43% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -6.94% | -2.54% | -4.40% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.75% | — | — |
Volatility
PFM vs. GQGU - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| PFM | GQGU | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 2.04% | — | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 7.13% | — | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 9.47% | 10.14% | -0.67% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 13.54% | 10.14% | +3.40% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 15.21% | 10.14% | +5.07% |
PFM vs. GQGU - Expense Ratio Comparison
PFM has a 0.53% expense ratio, which is higher than GQGU's 0.49% expense ratio.
Dividends
PFM vs. GQGU - Dividend Comparison
PFM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.33%, more than GQGU's 0.96% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
GQGU GQG US Equity ETF | 0.96% | 1.02% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 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 GQGU have a correlation of 0.26, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, GQGU is cheaper at 0.49% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
GQGU is cheaper with a 0.49% expense ratio, compared with 0.53% for PFM.
PFM has the higher dividend yield at 1.33%, compared with 0.96% for GQGU.
They also come from different issuers: Invesco and GQG Partners. Their fees differ too: 0.53% for PFM and 0.49% for GQGU.
Find the right allocation for PFM and GQGU
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