XOVR vs. PFM

Last updated Jun 25, 2026

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 3.96%/yr vs 10.57%/yr for PFM. A 0.59 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. XOVR charges 0.75%/yr vs 0.53%/yr for PFM.

Performance

XOVR vs. PFM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in ERShares Private-Public Crossover ETF (XOVR) and Invesco Dividend Achievers™ ETF (PFM). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, XOVR achieves a -2.09% return, which is significantly lower than PFM's 7.31% return.

XOVR

• 1D: 0.56%
• 1M: 0.97%
• YTD: -2.09%
• 6M: -3.85%
• 1Y: 5.57%
• 3Y*: 18.02%
• 5Y*: 3.96%
• 10Y*: —

PFM

• 1D: -0.11%
• 1M: 0.00%
• YTD: 7.31%
• 6M: 6.16%
• 1Y: 16.73%
• 3Y*: 15.60%
• 5Y*: 10.57%
• 10Y*: 11.75%

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

XOVR vs. PFM - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
XOVR ERShares Private-Public Crossover ETF	-2.09%	11.83%	33.21%	51.89%	-41.09%	-7.24%	50.39%	31.72%	-5.02%	1.54%
PFM Invesco Dividend Achievers™ ETF	7.31%	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 0.46, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.46
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.58
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.63
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 8, 2017	0.60

The correlation between XOVR and PFM shifts across timeframes, from 0.46 (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	33.7%	27.6%
Communication Services	26.7%	1.1%
Healthcare	17.1%	15.1%
Financial Services	9.1%	17.9%
Industrials	7.0%	10.7%
Consumer Cyclical	6.5%	3.7%
Energy	3.1%	4.3%
Basic Materials	-	2.8%
Consumer Defensive	-	11.1%
Real Estate	-	2.0%
Utilities	-	3.9%

Return for Risk

XOVR vs. PFM — Risk / Return Rank

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

XOVR

XOVR Risk / Return Rank: 12
XOVR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 12
XOVR Sortino Ratio Rank: 12
XOVR Omega Ratio Rank: 12
XOVR Calmar Ratio Rank: 11
XOVR Martin Ratio Rank: 11

PFM

PFM Risk / Return Rank: 59
PFM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 60
PFM Sortino Ratio Rank: 64
PFM Omega Ratio Rank: 59
PFM Calmar Ratio Rank: 54
PFM Martin Ratio Rank: 60

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.

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 ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.25	1.78	-1.53
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.50	2.61	-2.11
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.06	1.32	-0.26
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.23	2.37	-2.14
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	0.50	9.58	-9.08

XOVR vs. PFM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XOVR Sharpe Ratio is 0.25, which is lower than the PFM Sharpe Ratio of 1.78. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XOVR and PFM, 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

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.

Drawdown Indicators

	XOVR	PFM	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest 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 Drawdown Current decline from peak	-9.17%	-1.12%	-8.05%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-18.33%	-6.93%	-11.40%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	11.08%	1.75%	+9.33%

Volatility

XOVR vs. PFM - Volatility Comparison

ERShares Private-Public Crossover ETF (XOVR) has a higher volatility of 10.68% compared to Invesco Dividend Achievers™ ETF (PFM) at 2.35%. 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.

Volatility by Period

	XOVR	PFM	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	10.68%	2.35%	+8.33%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	17.32%	7.19%	+10.13%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	22.10%	9.49%	+12.61%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	26.47%	13.51%	+12.96%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	26.99%	15.20%	+11.79%

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 1.36%.

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%
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

Can I hold both XOVR and PFM in my portfolio?

XOVR and PFM have a correlation of 0.46, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, XOVR or PFM?

XOVR has higher volatility (10.68%) compared to PFM (2.35%). In terms of maximum drawdown, XOVR dropped -56.28% vs PFM's -53.21%.

Which ETF is better, XOVR or PFM?

On 5-year performance, PFM leads with 10.57% vs 3.96% for XOVR. On fees, PFM is cheaper at 0.53% per year. On volatility, PFM has been the lower-risk option at 2.35%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, XOVR or PFM?

Over the 5-year period, PFM has performed better with a 10.57% return vs 3.96%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, XOVR or PFM?

PFM is cheaper with a 0.53% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for XOVR.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, XOVR or PFM?

PFM has the higher dividend yield at 1.36%, compared with 0.00% for XOVR.

What is the main difference between XOVR and PFM?

They also come from different issuers: ERShares and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.75% for XOVR and 0.53% for PFM.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

PFM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.78 vs 0.25), 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.