TFNS vs. PBDC

Last updated Jun 26, 2026

TFNS (T. Rowe Price Financials ETF) and PBDC (Putnam BDC Income ETF) are both Financials Equities funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, TFNS returned 9.47% vs -12.57% for PBDC. At a 0.50 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. TFNS charges 0.44%/yr vs 13.49%/yr for PBDC.

Performance

TFNS vs. PBDC - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in T. Rowe Price Financials ETF (TFNS) and Putnam BDC Income ETF (PBDC). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, TFNS achieves a -0.33% return, which is significantly higher than PBDC's -11.79% return.

TFNS

• 1D: -0.43%
• 1M: 3.27%
• YTD: -0.33%
• 6M: -2.16%
• 1Y: 9.47%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

PBDC

• 1D: 0.38%
• 1M: -3.31%
• YTD: -11.79%
• 6M: -10.50%
• 1Y: -12.57%
• 3Y*: 6.72%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

TFNS vs. PBDC - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
TFNS T. Rowe Price Financials ETF	-0.33%	11.06%
PBDC Putnam BDC Income ETF	-11.79%	-2.00%

Correlation

The correlation between TFNS and PBDC is 0.52, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.52
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 12, 2025	0.50

The correlation between TFNS and PBDC has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.50 to 0.52 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

TFNS vs. PBDC — Risk / Return Rank

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

TFNS

TFNS Risk / Return Rank: 18
TFNS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 19
TFNS Sortino Ratio Rank: 18
TFNS Omega Ratio Rank: 18
TFNS Calmar Ratio Rank: 17
TFNS Martin Ratio Rank: 18

PBDC

PBDC Risk / Return Rank: 4
PBDC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4
PBDC Sortino Ratio Rank: 4
PBDC Omega Ratio Rank: 4
PBDC Calmar Ratio Rank: 4
PBDC Martin Ratio Rank: 4

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.

TFNS vs. PBDC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for T. Rowe Price Financials ETF (TFNS) and Putnam BDC Income ETF (PBDC). 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.

	TFNS	PBDC	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.64	-0.68	+1.32
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.95	-0.86	+1.81
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.12	0.90	+0.21
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.68	-0.63	+1.31
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	1.83	-1.08	+2.90

TFNS vs. PBDC - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current TFNS Sharpe Ratio is 0.64, which is higher than the PBDC Sharpe Ratio of -0.68. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of TFNS and PBDC, 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

TFNS vs. PBDC - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum TFNS drawdown since its inception was -14.00%, smaller than the maximum PBDC drawdown of -20.47%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for TFNS and PBDC.

Drawdown Indicators

	TFNS	PBDC	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-14.00%	-20.47%	+6.47%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-14.00%	-20.15%	+6.15%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-20.47%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-3.11%	-19.08%	+15.97%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.81%	-4.86%	+1.05%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	5.20%	11.70%	-6.50%

Volatility

TFNS vs. PBDC - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for T. Rowe Price Financials ETF (TFNS) is 4.10%, while Putnam BDC Income ETF (PBDC) has a volatility of 5.17%. This indicates that TFNS experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than PBDC based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	TFNS	PBDC	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.10%	5.17%	-1.07%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	11.38%	15.44%	-4.06%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	14.90%	18.62%	-3.72%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	15.01%	17.04%	-2.03%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	15.01%	17.04%	-2.03%

TFNS vs. PBDC - Expense Ratio Comparison

TFNS has a 0.44% expense ratio, which is lower than PBDC's 13.49% expense ratio.

Dividends

TFNS vs. PBDC - Dividend Comparison

TFNS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.49%, less than PBDC's 11.96% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022
PBDC Putnam BDC Income ETF	11.96%	10.53%	9.29%	9.86%	3.40%
TFNS T. Rowe Price Financials ETF	0.49%	0.49%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both TFNS and PBDC in my portfolio?

TFNS and PBDC have a correlation of 0.52, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, TFNS or PBDC?

PBDC has higher volatility (5.17%) compared to TFNS (4.10%). In terms of maximum drawdown, TFNS dropped -14.00% vs PBDC's -20.47%.

Which ETF is better, TFNS or PBDC?

On 1-year performance, TFNS leads with 9.47% vs -12.57% for PBDC. On fees, TFNS is cheaper at 0.44% per year. On volatility, TFNS has been the lower-risk option at 4.10%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, TFNS or PBDC?

Over the 1-year period, TFNS has performed better with a 9.47% return vs -12.57%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, TFNS or PBDC?

TFNS is cheaper with a 0.44% expense ratio, compared with 13.49% for PBDC.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, TFNS or PBDC?

PBDC has the higher dividend yield at 11.96%, compared with 0.49% for TFNS.

What is the main difference between TFNS and PBDC?

They also come from different issuers: T. Rowe Price and Franklin Templeton. Their fees differ too: 0.44% for TFNS and 13.49% for PBDC.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

TFNS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.64 vs -0.68), 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.