TMDV vs. ABLD

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

TMDV (ProShares Russell U.S. Dividend Growers ETF) and ABLD (Abacus FCF Real Assets Leaders ETF) are both Mid Cap Value Equities funds - TMDV tracks the Russell 3000 Dividend Elite Index while ABLD tracks the FCF Yield Enhanced Real Asset Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, TMDV returned 4.85%/yr vs 12.75%/yr for ABLD. A 0.72 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. TMDV charges 0.35%/yr vs 0.39%/yr for ABLD.

Performance

TMDV vs. ABLD - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in ProShares Russell U.S. Dividend Growers ETF (TMDV) and Abacus FCF Real Assets Leaders ETF (ABLD). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, TMDV achieves a 4.53% return, which is significantly lower than ABLD's 8.60% return.

TMDV

• 1D: -0.33%
• 1M: 0.05%
• YTD: 4.53%
• 6M: 4.29%
• 1Y: 5.96%
• 3Y*: 4.85%
• 5Y*: 2.41%
• 10Y*: —

ABLD

• 1D: -0.14%
• 1M: -2.02%
• YTD: 8.60%
• 6M: 8.04%
• 1Y: 15.09%
• 3Y*: 12.75%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

TMDV vs. ABLD - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
TMDV ProShares Russell U.S. Dividend Growers ETF	4.53%	2.91%	2.64%	2.25%	-5.10%	2.86%
ABLD Abacus FCF Real Assets Leaders ETF	8.60%	6.64%	7.05%	18.89%	7.42%	3.86%

Correlation

The correlation between TMDV and ABLD is 0.67, 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	0.67
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.74
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 15, 2021	0.72

The correlation between TMDV and ABLD has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.67 to 0.74 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

TMDV vs. ABLD — Risk / Return Rank

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

TMDV

TMDV Risk / Return Rank: 16
TMDV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 16
TMDV Sortino Ratio Rank: 17
TMDV Omega Ratio Rank: 15
TMDV Calmar Ratio Rank: 17
TMDV Martin Ratio Rank: 16

ABLD

ABLD Risk / Return Rank: 29
ABLD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 29
ABLD Sortino Ratio Rank: 27
ABLD Omega Ratio Rank: 29
ABLD Calmar Ratio Rank: 28
ABLD Martin Ratio Rank: 31

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.

TMDV vs. ABLD - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ProShares Russell U.S. Dividend Growers ETF (TMDV) and Abacus FCF Real Assets Leaders ETF (ABLD). 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.

	TMDV	ABLD	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.50	1.03	-0.54
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.82	1.47	-0.65
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.09	1.19	-0.10
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.61	1.30	-0.69
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	1.50	4.50	-3.00
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

TMDV vs. ABLD - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current TMDV Sharpe Ratio is 0.50, which is lower than the ABLD Sharpe Ratio of 1.03. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of TMDV and ABLD, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	TMDV	ABLD	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.50	1.03	-0.54
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.17	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.30	0.68	-0.37

Drawdowns

TMDV vs. ABLD - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum TMDV drawdown since its inception was -33.42%, which is greater than ABLD's maximum drawdown of -19.35%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for TMDV and ABLD.

Drawdown Indicators

	TMDV	ABLD	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-33.42%	-19.35%	-14.07%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-9.82%	-11.64%	+1.82%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-16.02%	-19.35%	+3.33%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-17.11%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-6.56%	-7.31%	+0.75%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-5.43%	-3.96%	-1.47%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.99%	3.36%	+0.63%

Volatility

TMDV vs. ABLD - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for ProShares Russell U.S. Dividend Growers ETF (TMDV) is 2.97%, while Abacus FCF Real Assets Leaders ETF (ABLD) has a volatility of 4.52%. This indicates that TMDV experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than ABLD based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	TMDV	ABLD	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.97%	4.52%	-1.55%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	8.53%	12.85%	-4.32%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	12.10%	14.70%	-2.60%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	14.43%	17.52%	-3.09%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	18.64%	17.52%	+1.12%

TMDV vs. ABLD - Expense Ratio Comparison

TMDV has a 0.35% expense ratio, which is lower than ABLD's 0.39% expense ratio.

Dividends

TMDV vs. ABLD - Dividend Comparison

TMDV's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.62%, less than ABLD's 4.20% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019
ABLD Abacus FCF Real Assets Leaders ETF	4.20%	2.86%	10.13%	4.70%	8.40%	0.08%	0.00%	0.00%
TMDV ProShares Russell U.S. Dividend Growers ETF	2.62%	2.65%	2.70%	2.45%	2.46%	2.14%	2.28%	0.16%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both TMDV and ABLD in my portfolio?

TMDV and ABLD have a correlation of 0.67, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, TMDV or ABLD?

ABLD has higher volatility (4.52%) compared to TMDV (2.97%). In terms of maximum drawdown, TMDV dropped -33.42% vs ABLD's -19.35%.

Which ETF is better, TMDV or ABLD?

On 3-year performance, ABLD leads with 12.75% vs 4.85% for TMDV. On fees, TMDV is cheaper at 0.35% per year. On volatility, TMDV has been the lower-risk option at 2.97%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, TMDV or ABLD?

Over the 3-year period, ABLD has performed better with a 12.75% return vs 4.85%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, TMDV or ABLD?

TMDV is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.39% for ABLD.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, TMDV or ABLD?

ABLD has the higher dividend yield at 4.20%, compared with 2.62% for TMDV.

What is the main difference between TMDV and ABLD?

TMDV tracks Russell 3000 Dividend Elite Index, while ABLD tracks FCF Yield Enhanced Real Asset Index. They also come from different issuers: ProShares and Abacus. Their fees differ too: 0.35% for TMDV and 0.39% for ABLD.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

ABLD currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.03 vs 0.50), 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.