Screener
PFM vs OMFL
Invesco Dividend Achievers ETF vs Invesco Russell 1000 Dynamic Multifactor ETF
Key differences
- OMFL costs 0.23% less per year.
- OMFL is significantly larger than PFM — larger funds tend to be more liquid and less likely to close.
- PFM is classified as equity, while OMFL is alternative — different risk/return profiles.
- PFM follows a index tracking strategy; OMFL uses systematic alpha.
- Over the last 3 years, PFM has delivered higher annualized returns.
- PFM has a longer track record, which may reduce uncertainty around long-term behavior.
Side-by-side comparison
| PFM | OMFL | |
|---|---|---|
| Annual cost (TER) | 0.52% | 0.29% |
| Fund size (AUM) | $764M | $4.6B |
| Since | 2005 | 2017 |
| Dividend yield | 1.37% | 0.78% |
| Asset class | equity | alternative |
| Region | north america | north america |
| Strategy | index tracking | systematic alpha |
| CAGR 1Y | +22.0% | +25.0% |
| CAGR 3Y | +16.2% | +14.3% |
| CAGR 5Y | +10.8% | +9.8% |
| Sharpe 3Y | 1.03 | 0.73 |
| Volatility 1Y | 9.62% | 12.16% |
| Max drawdown | -32.21% | -33.24% |
Green dot indicates the better value for that metric. Performance data is historical and does not predict future results.
Similar to PFM and OMFL
Explore further