ACVF vs. PSMD

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

ACVF (American Conservative Values ETF) and PSMD (Pacer Swan SOS Moderate (December) ETF) are both Large Cap Blend Equities funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past 5 years, ACVF returned 11.76%/yr vs 8.98%/yr for PSMD. Their correlation of 0.89 suggests significant overlap in exposure. Both charge a 0.75% expense ratio.

Performance

ACVF vs. PSMD - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in American Conservative Values ETF (ACVF) and Pacer Swan SOS Moderate (December) ETF (PSMD). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ACVF achieves a 8.21% return, which is significantly higher than PSMD's 4.91% return.

ACVF

• 1D: -1.39%
• 1M: -0.01%
• YTD: 8.21%
• 6M: 7.25%
• 1Y: 16.84%
• 3Y*: 18.14%
• 5Y*: 11.76%
• 10Y*: —

PSMD

• 1D: -0.51%
• 1M: -0.09%
• YTD: 4.91%
• 6M: 5.01%
• 1Y: 13.69%
• 3Y*: 12.16%
• 5Y*: 8.98%
• 10Y*: —

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

ACVF vs. PSMD - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
ACVF American Conservative Values ETF	8.21%	13.67%	20.56%	23.81%	-15.74%	28.84%	1.83%
PSMD Pacer Swan SOS Moderate (December) ETF	4.91%	11.45%	12.78%	17.46%	-4.47%	11.23%	0.55%

Correlation

The correlation between ACVF and PSMD is 0.87, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.87
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.85
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.88
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 23, 2020	0.89

The correlation between ACVF and PSMD has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.85 to 0.89 - a consistent structural relationship.

ACVF vs. PSMD - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	ACVF	PSMD
Technology	43.0%	34.1%
Financial Services	10.9%	12.6%
Industrials	10.4%	8.0%
Consumer Cyclical	10.2%	10.6%
Healthcare	7.9%	9.4%
Consumer Defensive	5.4%	5.0%
Communication Services	4.0%	11.2%
Energy	3.1%	3.2%
Utilities	1.9%	2.3%
Real Estate	1.6%	1.9%
Basic Materials	1.5%	1.8%

Return for Risk

ACVF vs. PSMD — Risk / Return Rank

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

ACVF

ACVF Risk / Return Rank: 45
ACVF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 42
ACVF Sortino Ratio Rank: 41
ACVF Omega Ratio Rank: 40
ACVF Calmar Ratio Rank: 47
ACVF Martin Ratio Rank: 53

PSMD

PSMD Risk / Return Rank: 81
PSMD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 81
PSMD Sortino Ratio Rank: 86
PSMD Omega Ratio Rank: 87
PSMD Calmar Ratio Rank: 67
PSMD Martin Ratio Rank: 84

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.

ACVF vs. PSMD - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for American Conservative Values ETF (ACVF) and Pacer Swan SOS Moderate (December) ETF (PSMD). 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.

	ACVF	PSMD	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.40	2.40	-1.00
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.97	3.55	-1.58
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.25	1.49	-0.24
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.20	3.11	-0.91
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	8.61	16.22	-7.60

ACVF vs. PSMD - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ACVF Sharpe Ratio is 1.40, which is lower than the PSMD Sharpe Ratio of 2.40. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ACVF and PSMD, 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

ACVF vs. PSMD - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ACVF drawdown since its inception was -24.39%, which is greater than PSMD's maximum drawdown of -11.96%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ACVF and PSMD.

Drawdown Indicators

	ACVF	PSMD	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-24.39%	-11.96%	-12.43%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-7.70%	-4.42%	-3.28%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-16.82%	-10.70%	-6.12%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-24.39%	-11.96%	-12.43%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.67%	-0.73%	-1.94%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-4.72%	-1.65%	-3.07%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.96%	0.85%	+1.11%

Volatility

ACVF vs. PSMD - Volatility Comparison

American Conservative Values ETF (ACVF) has a higher volatility of 4.97% compared to Pacer Swan SOS Moderate (December) ETF (PSMD) at 1.93%. This indicates that ACVF's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than PSMD based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	ACVF	PSMD	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.97%	1.93%	+3.04%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	9.92%	4.78%	+5.14%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	12.11%	5.75%	+6.36%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	16.35%	8.63%	+7.72%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	16.01%	8.47%	+7.54%

ACVF vs. PSMD - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both ACVF and PSMD have an expense ratio of 0.75%.

Dividends

ACVF vs. PSMD - Dividend Comparison

ACVF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.55%, while PSMD has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
ACVF American Conservative Values ETF	0.55%	0.59%	0.59%	0.82%	0.93%	0.61%	0.23%
PSMD Pacer Swan SOS Moderate (December) ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.47%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both ACVF and PSMD in my portfolio?

ACVF and PSMD have a correlation of 0.87, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, ACVF or PSMD?

ACVF has higher volatility (4.97%) compared to PSMD (1.93%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ACVF dropped -24.39% vs PSMD's -11.96%.

Which ETF is better, ACVF or PSMD?

On 5-year performance, ACVF leads with 11.76% vs 8.98% for PSMD. Both ETFs have the same 0.75% expense ratio. On volatility, PSMD has been the lower-risk option at 1.93%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, ACVF or PSMD?

Over the 5-year period, ACVF has performed better with a 11.76% return vs 8.98%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, ACVF or PSMD?

ACVF and PSMD have the same expense ratio: 0.75% per year.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, ACVF or PSMD?

ACVF has the higher dividend yield at 0.55%, compared with 0.00% for PSMD.

What is the main difference between ACVF and PSMD?

They also come from different issuers: Ridgeline Research LLC and Pacer.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

PSMD currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.40 vs 1.40), 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.