XOVR vs. PFM
XOVR (ERShares Private-Public Crossover ETF) and PFM (Invesco Dividend Achievers™ ETF) are both Large Cap Growth Equities funds. XOVR is actively managed, while PFM is passively managed. Over the past 5 years, XOVR returned 3.37%/yr vs 10.76%/yr for PFM. Their 0.59 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. XOVR charges 0.75%/yr vs 0.53%/yr for PFM.
Performance
XOVR vs. PFM - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, XOVR achieves a -4.47% return, which is significantly lower than PFM's 10.65% return.
XOVR
- 1D
- 3.44%
- 1M
- -8.38%
- 6M
- 4.57%
- YTD
- -4.47%
- 1Y
- -0.88%
- 3Y*
- 16.81%
- 5Y*
- 3.37%
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- 9.77%
PFM
- 1D
- 0.31%
- 1M
- 1.14%
- 6M
- 7.03%
- YTD
- 10.65%
- 1Y
- 19.46%
- 3Y*
- 15.73%
- 5Y*
- 10.76%
- 10Y*
- 11.56%
- ALL TIME*
- 8.78%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $789.97K | $827.49K | $977.52K | |
| $32.19M | $37.02M | $109.67M |
XOVR vs. PFM - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
XOVR ERShares Private-Public Crossover ETF | -4.47% | 11.83% | 33.21% | 51.89% | -41.09% | -7.24% | 50.39% | 31.72% | -5.02% | 1.54% |
PFM Invesco Dividend Achievers™ ETF | 10.65% | 14.00% | 16.87% | 11.40% | -6.22% | 23.08% | 9.53% | 26.88% | -4.58% | 5.53% |
Correlation
The correlation between XOVR and PFM is 0.43, which is low. Their historical price movements had little consistent relationship.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most. | 0.43 |
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history. | 0.56 |
Correlation (5Y) Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period. | 0.63 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 8, 2017 | 0.59 |
The correlation between XOVR and PFM shifts across timeframes, from 0.43 (1 year) to 0.63 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
XOVR vs. PFM - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
XOVR
PFM
Technology
Communication Services
Healthcare
Financial Services
Consumer Cyclical
Industrials
Energy
Basic Materials
-
Consumer Defensive
-
Real Estate
-
Utilities
-
Technology
XOVR
PFM
Communication Services
XOVR
PFM
Healthcare
XOVR
PFM
Financial Services
XOVR
PFM
Consumer Cyclical
XOVR
PFM
Industrials
XOVR
PFM
Energy
XOVR
PFM
Basic Materials
XOVR
-
PFM
Consumer Defensive
XOVR
-
PFM
Real Estate
XOVR
-
PFM
Utilities
XOVR
-
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
XOVR vs. PFM — Risk / Return Rank
XOVR
PFM
XOVR vs. PFM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ERShares Private-Public Crossover ETF (XOVR) 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.
| XOVR | PFM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -2.11 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -2.90 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.01 | 1.38 | -0.36 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.04 | 2.75 | -2.79 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -0.08 | 11.27 | -11.35 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
XOVR vs. PFM - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum XOVR drawdown since its inception was -56.28%, which is greater than PFM's maximum drawdown of -53.21%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XOVR and PFM.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| XOVR | PFM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -56.28% | -53.21% | -3.07% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -24.32% | -7.09% | -17.23% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -25.23% | -14.50% | -10.73% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -49.35% | -17.81% | -31.54% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -32.22% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -11.38% | -0.70% | -10.68% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -18.21% | -6.89% | -11.32% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 11.53% | 1.73% | +9.80% |
Volatility
XOVR vs. PFM - Volatility Comparison
ERShares Private-Public Crossover ETF (XOVR) has a higher volatility of 7.84% compared to Invesco Dividend Achievers™ ETF (PFM) at 2.43%. This indicates that XOVR'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
| XOVR | PFM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 7.84% | 2.43% | +5.41% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 19.11% | 7.12% | +11.99% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 23.67% | 9.46% | +14.21% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 26.68% | 13.47% | +13.21% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 27.03% | 15.19% | +11.84% |
XOVR vs. PFM - Expense Ratio Comparison
XOVR has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is higher than PFM's 0.53% expense ratio.
Dividends
XOVR vs. PFM - Dividend Comparison
XOVR has not paid dividends to shareholders, while PFM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.32%.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
PFM Invesco Dividend Achievers™ ETF | 1.32% | 1.41% | 1.58% | 1.86% | 1.95% | 1.69% | 1.92% | 1.94% | 2.27% | 1.70% | 2.56% | 2.36% |
XOVR ERShares Private-Public Crossover ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 57.75% | 6.31% | 0.08% | 3.71% | 0.08% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
XOVR and PFM have a correlation of 0.43, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
XOVR has higher volatility (7.84%) compared to PFM (2.43%). In terms of maximum drawdown, XOVR dropped -56.28% vs PFM's -53.21%.
On 5-year performance, PFM leads with 10.76% vs 3.37% for XOVR. On fees, PFM is cheaper at 0.53% per year. On volatility, PFM has been the lower-risk option at 2.43%. 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 10.76% return vs 3.37%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
PFM is cheaper with a 0.53% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for XOVR.
PFM has the higher dividend yield at 1.32%, compared with 0.00% for XOVR.
They also come from different issuers: ERShares and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.75% for XOVR and 0.53% for PFM.
PFM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.07 vs -0.04), 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 XOVR 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