TMDV vs. EQRR

Last updated Jun 25, 2026

TMDV (ProShares Russell U.S. Dividend Growers ETF) and EQRR (ProShares Equities for Rising Rates ETF) are both Mid Cap Value Equities funds from ProShares - TMDV tracks the Russell 3000 Dividend Elite Index while EQRR tracks the Nasdaq US Large Cap Equity Rising Rates Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, TMDV returned 3.80%/yr vs 12.09%/yr for EQRR. A 0.62 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. Both charge a 0.35% expense ratio.

Performance

TMDV vs. EQRR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in ProShares Russell U.S. Dividend Growers ETF (TMDV) and ProShares Equities for Rising Rates ETF (EQRR). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, TMDV achieves a 9.14% return, which is significantly lower than EQRR's 23.47% return.

TMDV

• 1D: 0.66%
• 1M: 3.29%
• YTD: 9.14%
• 6M: 8.08%
• 1Y: 11.29%
• 3Y*: 6.48%
• 5Y*: 3.80%
• 10Y*: —

EQRR

• 1D: -1.08%
• 1M: 0.31%
• YTD: 23.47%
• 6M: 22.44%
• 1Y: 35.55%
• 3Y*: 21.01%
• 5Y*: 12.09%
• 10Y*: —

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

TMDV vs. EQRR - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019
TMDV ProShares Russell U.S. Dividend Growers ETF	9.14%	2.91%	2.64%	2.25%	-5.10%	23.45%	4.82%	2.63%
EQRR ProShares Equities for Rising Rates ETF	23.47%	15.49%	7.69%	9.19%	2.20%	36.11%	-10.14%	4.20%

Correlation

The correlation between TMDV and EQRR is 0.41, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.41
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.63
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.64
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 7, 2019	0.62

Over the past year, the correlation between TMDV and EQRR has dropped to 0.41 - well below their long-term average of 0.62, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

TMDV vs. EQRR - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	TMDV	EQRR
Consumer Defensive	23.5%	-
Financial Services	16.1%	19.2%
Industrials	16.0%	4.9%
Utilities	12.2%	-
Basic Materials	12.2%	-
Consumer Cyclical	5.5%	4.7%
Healthcare	5.4%	-
Real Estate	4.8%	-
Energy	2.8%	24.1%
Technology	1.6%	36.3%
Communication Services	-	11.0%

Return for Risk

TMDV vs. EQRR — Risk / Return Rank

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

TMDV

TMDV Risk / Return Rank: 26
TMDV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 28
TMDV Sortino Ratio Rank: 29
TMDV Omega Ratio Rank: 25
TMDV Calmar Ratio Rank: 26
TMDV Martin Ratio Rank: 24

EQRR

EQRR Risk / Return Rank: 88
EQRR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 85
EQRR Sortino Ratio Rank: 81
EQRR Omega Ratio Rank: 83
EQRR Calmar Ratio Rank: 95
EQRR Martin Ratio Rank: 95

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. EQRR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ProShares Russell U.S. Dividend Growers ETF (TMDV) and ProShares Equities for Rising Rates ETF (EQRR). 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.

	TMDV	EQRR	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.94	2.44	-1.51
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.46	3.16	-1.70
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.16	1.44	-0.27
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.15	7.22	-6.06
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	2.78	24.73	-21.95

TMDV vs. EQRR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current TMDV Sharpe Ratio is 0.94, which is lower than the EQRR Sharpe Ratio of 2.44. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of TMDV and EQRR, 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

TMDV vs. EQRR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum TMDV drawdown since its inception was -33.42%, smaller than the maximum EQRR drawdown of -57.93%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for TMDV and EQRR.

Drawdown Indicators

	TMDV	EQRR	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-33.42%	-57.93%	+24.51%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-9.82%	-4.95%	-4.87%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-16.02%	-17.75%	+1.73%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-17.11%	-21.75%	+4.64%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.44%	-3.66%	+1.22%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-5.41%	-10.02%	+4.61%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.07%	1.44%	+2.63%

Volatility

TMDV vs. EQRR - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for ProShares Russell U.S. Dividend Growers ETF (TMDV) is 3.27%, while ProShares Equities for Rising Rates ETF (EQRR) has a volatility of 7.33%. This indicates that TMDV experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than EQRR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	TMDV	EQRR	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.27%	7.33%	-4.06%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	8.61%	11.76%	-3.15%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	12.13%	14.64%	-2.51%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	14.42%	21.42%	-7.00%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	18.60%	24.87%	-6.27%

TMDV vs. EQRR - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both TMDV and EQRR have an expense ratio of 0.35%.

Dividends

TMDV vs. EQRR - Dividend Comparison

TMDV's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.51%, more than EQRR's 1.24% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
EQRR ProShares Equities for Rising Rates ETF	1.24%	1.70%	2.17%	2.77%	2.34%	1.71%	2.17%	2.05%	2.47%	0.69%
TMDV ProShares Russell U.S. Dividend Growers ETF	2.51%	2.65%	2.70%	2.45%	2.46%	2.14%	2.28%	0.16%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both TMDV and EQRR in my portfolio?

TMDV and EQRR have a correlation of 0.41, 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 EQRR?

EQRR has higher volatility (7.33%) compared to TMDV (3.27%). In terms of maximum drawdown, TMDV dropped -33.42% vs EQRR's -57.93%.

Which ETF is better, TMDV or EQRR?

On 5-year performance, EQRR leads with 12.09% vs 3.80% for TMDV. Both ETFs have the same 0.35% expense ratio. On volatility, TMDV has been the lower-risk option at 3.27%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, TMDV or EQRR?

Over the 5-year period, EQRR has performed better with a 12.09% return vs 3.80%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, TMDV or EQRR?

TMDV and EQRR have the same expense ratio: 0.35% per year.

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

TMDV has the higher dividend yield at 2.51%, compared with 1.24% for EQRR.

What is the main difference between TMDV and EQRR?

TMDV tracks Russell 3000 Dividend Elite Index, while EQRR tracks Nasdaq US Large Cap Equity Rising Rates Index.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

EQRR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.44 vs 0.94), 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.