PFM vs. TDVG

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

PFM (Invesco Dividend Achievers™ ETF) and TDVG (T. Rowe Price Dividend Growth ETF) are both Large Cap Growth Equities funds. PFM is passively managed, while TDVG is actively managed. Over the past 5 years, PFM returned 10.77%/yr vs 10.19%/yr for TDVG. With a 0.96 correlation, they move nearly in lockstep. PFM charges 0.53%/yr vs 0.50%/yr for TDVG.

Performance

PFM vs. TDVG - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Invesco Dividend Achievers™ ETF (PFM) 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, PFM achieves a 7.43% return, which is significantly lower than TDVG's 8.04% return.

PFM

• 1D: -0.16%
• 1M: 0.12%
• YTD: 7.43%
• 6M: 6.87%
• 1Y: 18.00%
• 3Y*: 15.64%
• 5Y*: 10.77%
• 10Y*: 11.76%

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)

PFM vs. TDVG - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
PFM Invesco Dividend Achievers™ ETF	7.43%	14.00%	16.87%	11.40%	-6.22%	23.08%	11.65%
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 PFM and TDVG is 0.94, 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	0.94
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.95
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.96
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 5, 2020	0.96

The correlation between PFM and TDVG has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.94 to 0.96 - a consistent structural relationship.

PFM vs. TDVG - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	PFM	TDVG
Technology	27.6%	26.2%
Financial Services	17.9%	19.3%
Healthcare	15.1%	12.4%
Consumer Defensive	11.1%	6.9%
Industrials	10.7%	13.6%
Energy	4.3%	5.3%
Utilities	3.9%	3.8%
Consumer Cyclical	3.7%	7.2%
Basic Materials	2.8%	2.8%
Real Estate	2.0%	1.6%
Communication Services	1.1%	1.0%

Return for Risk

PFM vs. TDVG — Risk / Return Rank

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

PFM

PFM Risk / Return Rank: 60
PFM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 61
PFM Sortino Ratio Rank: 65
PFM Omega Ratio Rank: 59
PFM Calmar Ratio Rank: 55
PFM Martin Ratio Rank: 61

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.

PFM vs. TDVG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco Dividend Achievers™ ETF (PFM) 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.

	PFM	TDVG	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.91	1.81	+0.10
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.79	2.60	+0.19
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.34	1.32	+0.02
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.55	2.44	+0.11
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	10.32	10.01	+0.30

PFM vs. TDVG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current PFM Sharpe Ratio is 1.91, which is comparable to the TDVG Sharpe Ratio of 1.81. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of PFM 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

PFM vs. TDVG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PFM drawdown since its inception was -53.21%, which is greater than TDVG's maximum drawdown of -19.20%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PFM and TDVG.

Drawdown Indicators

	PFM	TDVG	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-53.21%	-19.20%	-34.01%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-7.09%	-7.24%	+0.15%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-14.50%	-14.02%	-0.48%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-17.81%	-19.20%	+1.39%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-32.22%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.01%	-0.82%	-0.19%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-6.93%	-3.73%	-3.20%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.75%	1.76%	-0.01%

Volatility

PFM vs. TDVG - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Invesco Dividend Achievers™ ETF (PFM) is 2.48%, while T. Rowe Price Dividend Growth ETF (TDVG) has a volatility of 2.78%. This indicates that PFM experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than TDVG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	PFM	TDVG	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.48%	2.78%	-0.30%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	7.21%	7.61%	-0.40%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	9.53%	9.79%	-0.26%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	13.51%	13.92%	-0.41%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	15.20%	13.90%	+1.30%

PFM vs. TDVG - Expense Ratio Comparison

PFM has a 0.53% expense ratio, which is higher than TDVG's 0.50% expense ratio.

Dividends

PFM vs. TDVG - Dividend Comparison

PFM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.36%, more than TDVG's 0.98% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
PFM Invesco Dividend Achievers™ ETF	1.36%	1.41%	1.58%	1.86%	1.95%	1.69%	1.92%	1.94%	2.27%	1.70%	2.56%	2.36%
TDVG T. Rowe Price Dividend Growth ETF	0.98%	1.00%	1.06%	1.31%	1.15%	0.80%	0.40%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both PFM and TDVG in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.94, PFM and TDVG move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

Which is riskier, PFM or TDVG?

TDVG has higher volatility (2.78%) compared to PFM (2.48%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PFM dropped -53.21% vs TDVG's -19.20%.

Which ETF is better, PFM or TDVG?

On 5-year performance, PFM leads with 10.77% vs 10.19% for TDVG. On fees, TDVG is cheaper at 0.50% per year. On volatility, PFM has been the lower-risk option at 2.48%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, PFM or TDVG?

Over the 5-year period, PFM has performed better with a 10.77% return vs 10.19%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, PFM or TDVG?

TDVG is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.53% for PFM.

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

PFM has the higher dividend yield at 1.36%, compared with 0.98% for TDVG.

What is the main difference between PFM and TDVG?

They also come from different issuers: Invesco and T. Rowe Price. Their fees differ too: 0.53% for PFM and 0.50% for TDVG.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

PFM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.91 vs 1.81), 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.