PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
AFLG vs. PALC
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

AFLG vs. PALC - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in First Trust Active Factor Large Cap ETF (AFLG) and Pacer Lunt Large Cap Multi-Factor Alternator ETF (PALC). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, AFLG achieves a 12.37% return, which is significantly higher than PALC's 11.39% return.


AFLG

1D
-0.53%
1M
3.98%
YTD
12.37%
6M
12.19%
1Y
24.98%
3Y*
22.74%
5Y*
12.91%
10Y*

PALC

1D
-0.38%
1M
6.95%
YTD
11.39%
6M
12.77%
1Y
21.51%
3Y*
17.82%
5Y*
9.40%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

AFLG vs. PALC - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020
AFLG
First Trust Active Factor Large Cap ETF
12.37%14.23%27.02%20.10%-16.41%27.29%20.36%
PALC
Pacer Lunt Large Cap Multi-Factor Alternator ETF
11.39%7.28%21.24%17.52%-14.74%41.03%22.18%

Correlation

The correlation between AFLG and PALC is 0.80, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.80

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.84

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.87

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 26, 2020

0.86

The correlation between AFLG and PALC has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.80 to 0.87 - a consistent structural relationship.

AFLG vs. PALC - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
AFLG
PALC

Technology

33.6%
15.2%

Consumer Cyclical

10.2%
4.9%

Communication Services

10.1%
6.2%

Financial Services

10.0%
22.6%

Industrials

9.4%
14.1%

Healthcare

7.8%
11.9%

Consumer Defensive

4.2%
10.6%

Utilities

4.1%
1.5%

Real Estate

3.8%
0.3%

Basic Materials

3.6%
2.2%

Energy

3.2%
10.6%

Technology

AFLG
33.6%
PALC
15.2%

Consumer Cyclical

AFLG
10.2%
PALC
4.9%

Communication Services

AFLG
10.1%
PALC
6.2%

Financial Services

AFLG
10.0%
PALC
22.6%

Industrials

AFLG
9.4%
PALC
14.1%

Healthcare

AFLG
7.8%
PALC
11.9%

Consumer Defensive

AFLG
4.2%
PALC
10.6%

Utilities

AFLG
4.1%
PALC
1.5%

Real Estate

AFLG
3.8%
PALC
0.3%

Basic Materials

AFLG
3.6%
PALC
2.2%

Energy

AFLG
3.2%
PALC
10.6%

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

AFLG vs. PALC — Risk / Return Rank

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

AFLG
AFLG Risk / Return Rank: 6767
Overall Rank
AFLG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6666
Sharpe Ratio Rank
AFLG Sortino Ratio Rank: 6666
Sortino Ratio Rank
AFLG Omega Ratio Rank: 6565
Omega Ratio Rank
AFLG Calmar Ratio Rank: 6262
Calmar Ratio Rank
AFLG Martin Ratio Rank: 7474
Martin Ratio Rank

PALC
PALC Risk / Return Rank: 5252
Overall Rank
PALC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5454
Sharpe Ratio Rank
PALC Sortino Ratio Rank: 5555
Sortino Ratio Rank
PALC Omega Ratio Rank: 5151
Omega Ratio Rank
PALC Calmar Ratio Rank: 4949
Calmar Ratio Rank
PALC Martin Ratio Rank: 5353
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

AFLG vs. PALC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for First Trust Active Factor Large Cap ETF (AFLG) and Pacer Lunt Large Cap Multi-Factor Alternator ETF (PALC). 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.


AFLGPALCDifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

2.19

1.87

+0.32

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

3.07

2.65

+0.42

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

1.39

1.32

+0.07

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

3.06

2.42

+0.65

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

14.04

8.98

+5.06

AFLG vs. PALC - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current AFLG Sharpe Ratio is 2.19, which is comparable to the PALC Sharpe Ratio of 1.87. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of AFLG and PALC, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


AFLGPALCDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.19

1.87

+0.32

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.82

0.58

+0.24

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.74

0.98

-0.24

Drawdowns

AFLG vs. PALC - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum AFLG drawdown since its inception was -35.84%, which is greater than PALC's maximum drawdown of -24.45%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for AFLG and PALC.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


AFLGPALCDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-35.84%

-24.45%

-11.39%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-8.19%

-8.94%

+0.75%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-17.49%

-17.39%

-0.10%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-23.48%

-24.45%

+0.97%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.53%

-0.38%

-0.15%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-5.71%

-6.33%

+0.62%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.78%

2.40%

-0.62%

Volatility

AFLG vs. PALC - Volatility Comparison

First Trust Active Factor Large Cap ETF (AFLG) and Pacer Lunt Large Cap Multi-Factor Alternator ETF (PALC) have volatilities of 2.86% and 2.95%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


AFLGPALCDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

2.86%

2.95%

-0.09%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

8.81%

8.55%

+0.26%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

11.47%

11.58%

-0.11%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

15.82%

16.22%

-0.40%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

19.20%

17.07%

+2.13%

AFLG vs. PALC - Expense Ratio Comparison

AFLG has a 0.55% expense ratio, which is lower than PALC's 0.60% expense ratio.


Dividends

AFLG vs. PALC - Dividend Comparison

AFLG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.70%, less than PALC's 1.04% yield.


PositionTTM2025202420232022202120202019
AFLG
First Trust Active Factor Large Cap ETF
0.70%0.84%0.53%1.53%1.52%0.93%1.28%0.20%
PALC
Pacer Lunt Large Cap Multi-Factor Alternator ETF
1.04%1.08%0.93%0.74%1.69%0.64%0.72%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


AFLG and PALC have a correlation of 0.80, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

PALC has higher volatility (2.95%) compared to AFLG (2.86%). In terms of maximum drawdown, AFLG dropped -35.84% vs PALC's -24.45%.

On 5-year performance, AFLG leads with 12.91% vs 9.40% for PALC. On fees, AFLG is cheaper at 0.55% per year. Their volatility is very similar. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 5-year period, AFLG has performed better with a 12.91% return vs 9.40%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

AFLG is cheaper with a 0.55% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for PALC.

PALC has the higher dividend yield at 1.04%, compared with 0.70% for AFLG.

AFLG tracks Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta U.S. Large Cap Equity Index, while PALC tracks Lunt Capital U.S. Large Cap Multi-Factor Rotation Index. They also come from different issuers: First Trust and Pacer. Their fees differ too: 0.55% for AFLG and 0.60% for PALC.

AFLG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.19 vs 1.87), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for AFLG and PALC

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