TCHP vs. PFM

Last updated Aug 4, 2026

TCHP (T. Rowe Price Blue Chip Growth ETF) and PFM (Invesco Dividend Achievers™ ETF) are both Large Cap Growth Equities funds. TCHP is actively managed, while PFM is passively managed. Over the past 5 years, TCHP returned 8.81%/yr vs 10.76%/yr for PFM. Their 0.65 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. TCHP charges 0.57%/yr vs 0.53%/yr for PFM.

Performance

TCHP vs. PFM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in T. Rowe Price Blue Chip Growth ETF (TCHP) and Invesco Dividend Achievers™ ETF (PFM). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, TCHP achieves a 0.24% return, which is significantly lower than PFM's 10.65% return.

TCHP

• 1D: 2.36%
• 1M: 1.40%
• 6M: 2.10%
• YTD: 0.24%
• 1Y: 8.87%
• 3Y*: 21.26%
• 5Y*: 8.81%
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 12.13%

PFM

• 1D: 0.31%
• 1M: 1.14%
• 6M: 7.03%
• YTD: 10.65%
• 1Y: 19.46%
• 3Y*: 15.73%
• 5Y*: 10.76%
• 10Y*: 11.56%
• ALL TIME*: 8.78%

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
PFM Invesco Dividend Achievers™ ETF	$789.97K	$827.49K	$977.52K
TCHP T. Rowe Price Blue Chip Growth ETF	$8.53M	$10.40M	$11.99M

TCHP vs. PFM - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
TCHP T. Rowe Price Blue Chip Growth ETF	0.24%	18.40%	36.06%	50.10%	-37.81%	18.08%	11.58%
PFM Invesco Dividend Achievers™ ETF	10.65%	14.00%	16.87%	11.40%	-6.22%	23.08%	11.65%

Correlation

The correlation between TCHP and PFM is 0.48, which is low. Their historical price movements had little consistent relationship.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.48
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history.	0.56
Correlation (5Y) Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period.	0.66
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 5, 2020	0.65

The correlation between TCHP and PFM shifts across timeframes, from 0.48 (1 year) to 0.66 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

TCHP vs. PFM - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	TCHP	PFM
Technology	51.6%	23.4%
Communication Services	17.8%	1.0%
Consumer Cyclical	11.8%	4.0%
Financial Services	6.9%	19.0%
Healthcare	5.9%	16.6%
Industrials	5.3%	11.6%
Basic Materials	0.4%	3.0%
Utilities	0.4%	4.1%
Consumer Defensive	0.0%	11.3%
Energy	-	4.2%
Real Estate	-	2.0%

Return for Risk

TCHP vs. PFM — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

TCHP

TCHP Risk / Return Rank: 22
TCHP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 23
TCHP Sortino Ratio Rank: 22
TCHP Omega Ratio Rank: 22
TCHP Calmar Ratio Rank: 20
TCHP Martin Ratio Rank: 22

PFM

PFM Risk / Return Rank: 82
PFM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 85
PFM Sortino Ratio Rank: 87
PFM Omega Ratio Rank: 84
PFM Calmar Ratio Rank: 75
PFM Martin Ratio Rank: 81

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

TCHP vs. PFM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for T. Rowe Price Blue Chip Growth ETF (TCHP) and Invesco Dividend Achievers™ ETF (PFM). 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.

	TCHP	PFM	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.49	2.07	-1.58
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.80	3.01	-2.21
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.10	1.38	-0.28
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.51	2.75	-2.25
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	1.50	11.27	-9.77

TCHP vs. PFM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current TCHP Sharpe Ratio is 0.49, which is lower than the PFM Sharpe Ratio of 2.07. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of TCHP and PFM, 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

TCHP vs. PFM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum TCHP drawdown since its inception was -42.34%, smaller than the maximum PFM drawdown of -53.21%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for TCHP and PFM.

Drawdown Indicators

	TCHP	PFM	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-42.34%	-53.21%	+10.87%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-17.50%	-7.09%	-10.41%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-22.92%	-14.50%	-8.42%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-42.34%	-17.81%	-24.53%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-32.22%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-5.73%	-0.70%	-5.03%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-11.33%	-6.89%	-4.44%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	5.91%	1.73%	+4.18%

Volatility

TCHP vs. PFM - Volatility Comparison

T. Rowe Price Blue Chip Growth ETF (TCHP) has a higher volatility of 6.66% compared to Invesco Dividend Achievers™ ETF (PFM) at 2.43%. This indicates that TCHP's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than PFM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	TCHP	PFM	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.66%	2.43%	+4.23%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	14.69%	7.12%	+7.57%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	18.24%	9.46%	+8.78%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	23.73%	13.47%	+10.26%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	23.20%	15.19%	+8.01%

TCHP vs. PFM - Expense Ratio Comparison

TCHP has a 0.57% expense ratio, which is higher than PFM's 0.53% expense ratio.

Dividends

TCHP vs. PFM - Dividend Comparison

TCHP has not paid dividends to shareholders, while PFM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.32%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
PFM Invesco Dividend Achievers™ ETF	1.32%	1.41%	1.58%	1.86%	1.95%	1.69%	1.92%	1.94%	2.27%	1.70%	2.56%	2.36%
TCHP T. Rowe Price Blue Chip Growth ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.02%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both TCHP and PFM in my portfolio?

TCHP and PFM have a correlation of 0.48, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, TCHP or PFM?

TCHP has higher volatility (6.66%) compared to PFM (2.43%). In terms of maximum drawdown, TCHP dropped -42.34% vs PFM's -53.21%.

Which ETF is better, TCHP or PFM?

On 5-year performance, PFM leads with 10.76% vs 8.81% for TCHP. On fees, PFM is cheaper at 0.53% per year. On volatility, PFM has been the lower-risk option at 2.43%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, TCHP or PFM?

Over the 5-year period, PFM has performed better with a 10.76% return vs 8.81%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, TCHP or PFM?

PFM is cheaper with a 0.53% expense ratio, compared with 0.57% for TCHP.

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

PFM has the higher dividend yield at 1.32%, compared with 0.00% for TCHP.

What is the main difference between TCHP and PFM?

They also come from different issuers: T. Rowe Price and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.57% for TCHP and 0.53% for PFM.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

PFM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.07 vs 0.49), 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.