TDVG vs. BTR

Last updated Aug 2, 2026

TDVG (T. Rowe Price Dividend Growth ETF) and BTR (Beacon Tactical Risk ETF) are both Large Cap Blend Equities funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past 3 years, TDVG returned 14.55%/yr vs 4.17%/yr for BTR. Their 0.78 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. TDVG charges 0.50%/yr vs 1.10%/yr for BTR.

Performance

TDVG vs. BTR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in T. Rowe Price Dividend Growth ETF (TDVG) and Beacon Tactical Risk ETF (BTR). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, TDVG achieves a 10.93% return, which is significantly higher than BTR's 9.64% return.

TDVG

• 1D: -0.24%
• 1M: 0.47%
• 6M: 9.09%
• YTD: 10.93%
• 1Y: 19.23%
• 3Y*: 14.55%
• 5Y*: 10.00%
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 13.28%

BTR

• 1D: 0.20%
• 1M: -0.14%
• 6M: 5.82%
• YTD: 9.64%
• 1Y: 17.44%
• 3Y*: 4.17%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 4.20%

*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)
BTR Beacon Tactical Risk ETF	$78.21K	$71.52K	$93.67K
TDVG T. Rowe Price Dividend Growth ETF	$2.11M	$3.07M	$2.63M

TDVG vs. BTR - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
TDVG T. Rowe Price Dividend Growth ETF	10.93%	14.80%	13.45%	10.11%
BTR Beacon Tactical Risk ETF	9.64%	-2.15%	14.45%	-6.78%

Correlation

The correlation between TDVG and BTR is 0.88, meaning they have usually moved in the same direction, including during past declines.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.88
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history.	0.84
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 18, 2023	0.78

The correlation between TDVG and BTR has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.78 to 0.88 - a consistent structural relationship.

TDVG vs. BTR - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	TDVG	BTR
Technology	27.4%	12.3%
Financial Services	19.3%	7.5%
Industrials	14.4%	9.5%
Healthcare	12.8%	9.5%
Consumer Cyclical	6.7%	9.4%
Consumer Defensive	6.6%	7.9%
Energy	4.5%	10.0%
Utilities	3.2%	8.7%
Basic Materials	2.8%	8.2%
Real Estate	1.5%	8.4%
Communication Services	0.8%	8.6%

Return for Risk

TDVG vs. BTR — Risk / Return Rank

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

TDVG

TDVG Risk / Return Rank: 80
TDVG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 82
TDVG Sortino Ratio Rank: 83
TDVG Omega Ratio Rank: 80
TDVG Calmar Ratio Rank: 73
TDVG Martin Ratio Rank: 81

BTR

BTR Risk / Return Rank: 74
BTR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 72
BTR Sortino Ratio Rank: 71
BTR Omega Ratio Rank: 72
BTR Calmar Ratio Rank: 74
BTR Martin Ratio Rank: 79

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.

TDVG vs. BTR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for T. Rowe Price Dividend Growth ETF (TDVG) and Beacon Tactical Risk ETF (BTR). 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.

	TDVG	BTR	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.87	1.66	+0.22
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.69	2.33	+0.36
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.34	1.30	+0.03
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.51	2.61	-0.10
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	10.48	10.17	+0.31

TDVG vs. BTR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current TDVG Sharpe Ratio is 1.87, which is comparable to the BTR Sharpe Ratio of 1.66. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of TDVG and BTR, 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

TDVG vs. BTR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum TDVG drawdown since its inception was -19.20%, which is greater than BTR's maximum drawdown of -16.67%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for TDVG and BTR.

Drawdown Indicators

	TDVG	BTR	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-19.20%	-16.67%	-2.53%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-7.24%	-6.23%	-1.01%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-14.02%	-16.67%	+2.65%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-19.20%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.92%	-0.67%	-0.25%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.67%	-5.34%	+1.67%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.73%	1.60%	+0.13%

Volatility

TDVG vs. BTR - Volatility Comparison

T. Rowe Price Dividend Growth ETF (TDVG) and Beacon Tactical Risk ETF (BTR) have volatilities of 2.20% and 2.20%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	TDVG	BTR	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.20%	2.20%	0.00%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	7.30%	7.15%	+0.15%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	9.74%	9.86%	-0.12%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	13.87%	10.80%	+3.07%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	13.81%	10.80%	+3.01%

TDVG vs. BTR - Expense Ratio Comparison

TDVG has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is lower than BTR's 1.10% expense ratio.

Dividends

TDVG vs. BTR - Dividend Comparison

TDVG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.96%, less than BTR's 1.17% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
BTR Beacon Tactical Risk ETF	1.17%	1.29%	0.87%	0.91%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
TDVG T. Rowe Price Dividend Growth ETF	0.96%	1.00%	1.06%	1.31%	1.15%	0.80%	0.40%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both TDVG and BTR in my portfolio?

TDVG and BTR have a correlation of 0.88, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, TDVG or BTR?

BTR has higher volatility (2.20%) compared to TDVG (2.20%). In terms of maximum drawdown, TDVG dropped -19.20% vs BTR's -16.67%.

Which ETF is better, TDVG or BTR?

On 3-year performance, TDVG leads with 14.55% vs 4.17% for BTR. On fees, TDVG is cheaper at 0.50% per year. Their volatility is very similar. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, TDVG or BTR?

Over the 3-year period, TDVG has performed better with a 14.55% return vs 4.17%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, TDVG or BTR?

TDVG is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 1.10% for BTR.

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

BTR has the higher dividend yield at 1.17%, compared with 0.96% for TDVG.

What is the main difference between TDVG and BTR?

They also come from different issuers: T. Rowe Price and American Beacon. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for TDVG and 1.10% for BTR.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

TDVG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.87 vs 1.66), 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.