TGRW vs. PFM
TGRW (T. Rowe Price Growth Stock ETF) and PFM (Invesco Dividend Achievers™ ETF) are both Large Cap Growth Equities funds. TGRW is actively managed, while PFM is passively managed. Over the past 5 years, TGRW returned 7.54%/yr vs 10.77%/yr for PFM. A 0.66 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. TGRW charges 0.52%/yr vs 0.53%/yr for PFM.
Performance
TGRW vs. PFM - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, TGRW achieves a 0.74% return, which is significantly lower than PFM's 7.43% return.
TGRW
- 1D
- -1.34%
- 1M
- -3.27%
- YTD
- 0.74%
- 6M
- -0.34%
- 1Y
- 15.30%
- 3Y*
- 19.72%
- 5Y*
- 7.54%
- 10Y*
- —
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%
TGRW vs. PFM - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
TGRW T. Rowe Price Growth Stock ETF | 0.74% | 15.62% | 29.94% | 48.87% | -38.42% | 14.97% | 16.40% |
PFM Invesco Dividend Achievers™ ETF | 7.43% | 14.00% | 16.87% | 11.40% | -6.22% | 23.08% | 11.65% |
Correlation
The correlation between TGRW and PFM is 0.53, 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 | 0.53 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.59 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.67 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 5, 2020 | 0.66 |
The correlation between TGRW and PFM shifts across timeframes, from 0.53 (1 year) to 0.67 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
TGRW vs. PFM - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
TGRW
PFM
Technology
Communication Services
Consumer Cyclical
Healthcare
Financial Services
Industrials
Consumer Defensive
Basic Materials
Real Estate
Energy
-
Utilities
-
Technology
TGRW
PFM
Communication Services
TGRW
PFM
Consumer Cyclical
TGRW
PFM
Healthcare
TGRW
PFM
Financial Services
TGRW
PFM
Industrials
TGRW
PFM
Consumer Defensive
TGRW
PFM
Basic Materials
TGRW
PFM
Real Estate
TGRW
PFM
Energy
TGRW
-
PFM
Utilities
TGRW
-
PFM
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
TGRW vs. PFM — Risk / Return Rank
TGRW
PFM
TGRW vs. PFM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for T. Rowe Price Growth Stock ETF (TGRW) 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.
| TGRW | PFM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -1.02 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -1.49 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.16 | 1.34 | -0.18 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.82 | 2.55 | -1.73 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 2.53 | 10.32 | -7.78 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
TGRW vs. PFM - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum TGRW drawdown since its inception was -43.33%, smaller than the maximum PFM drawdown of -53.21%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for TGRW and PFM.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| TGRW | PFM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -43.33% | -53.21% | +9.88% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -18.84% | -7.09% | -11.75% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -23.18% | -14.50% | -8.68% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -43.33% | -17.81% | -25.52% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -32.22% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -6.51% | -1.01% | -5.50% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -12.40% | -6.93% | -5.47% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 6.05% | 1.75% | +4.30% |
Volatility
TGRW vs. PFM - Volatility Comparison
T. Rowe Price Growth Stock ETF (TGRW) has a higher volatility of 6.40% compared to Invesco Dividend Achievers™ ETF (PFM) at 2.48%. This indicates that TGRW'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.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| TGRW | PFM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 6.40% | 2.48% | +3.92% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 13.54% | 7.21% | +6.33% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 17.40% | 9.53% | +7.87% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 23.40% | 13.51% | +9.89% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 23.04% | 15.20% | +7.84% |
TGRW vs. PFM - Expense Ratio Comparison
TGRW has a 0.52% expense ratio, which is lower than PFM's 0.53% expense ratio.
Dividends
TGRW vs. PFM - Dividend Comparison
TGRW has not paid dividends to shareholders, while PFM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.36%.
| 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% |
TGRW T. Rowe Price Growth Stock ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.01% | 0.00% | 0.40% | 0.21% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
TGRW and PFM have a correlation of 0.53, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
TGRW has higher volatility (6.40%) compared to PFM (2.48%). In terms of maximum drawdown, TGRW dropped -43.33% vs PFM's -53.21%.
On 5-year performance, PFM leads with 10.77% vs 7.54% for TGRW. On fees, TGRW is cheaper at 0.52% 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.
Over the 5-year period, PFM has performed better with a 10.77% return vs 7.54%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
TGRW is cheaper with a 0.52% expense ratio, compared with 0.53% for PFM.
PFM has the higher dividend yield at 1.36%, compared with 0.00% for TGRW.
They also come from different issuers: T. Rowe Price and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.52% for TGRW and 0.53% for PFM.
PFM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.91 vs 0.88), 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.
Find the right allocation for TGRW and PFM
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