PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
BLUC vs. PSCX
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

BLUC vs. PSCX - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Bluemonte Large Cap Core ETF (BLUC) and Pacer Swan SOS Conservative (December) ETF (PSCX). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BLUC achieves a 10.68% return, which is significantly higher than PSCX's 5.25% return.


BLUC

1D
0.39%
1M
5.04%
YTD
10.68%
6M
10.43%
1Y
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*

PSCX

1D
0.14%
1M
1.81%
YTD
5.25%
6M
6.09%
1Y
15.59%
3Y*
13.00%
5Y*
8.49%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

BLUC vs. PSCX - Yearly Performance Comparison


Correlation

The correlation between BLUC and PSCX is 0.92, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.


Correlation
Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 24, 2025

0.92

BLUC vs. PSCX - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
BLUC
PSCX

Technology

40.6%
33.2%

Communication Services

12.5%
10.3%

Consumer Cyclical

10.7%
10.0%

Financial Services

9.8%
12.5%

Healthcare

7.7%
9.6%

Industrials

7.3%
8.4%

Consumer Defensive

4.0%
5.4%

Energy

2.7%
4.2%

Utilities

1.7%
2.6%

Real Estate

1.6%
2.0%

Basic Materials

1.5%
1.9%

Technology

BLUC
40.6%
PSCX
33.2%

Communication Services

BLUC
12.5%
PSCX
10.3%

Consumer Cyclical

BLUC
10.7%
PSCX
10.0%

Financial Services

BLUC
9.8%
PSCX
12.5%

Healthcare

BLUC
7.7%
PSCX
9.6%

Industrials

BLUC
7.3%
PSCX
8.4%

Consumer Defensive

BLUC
4.0%
PSCX
5.4%

Energy

BLUC
2.7%
PSCX
4.2%

Utilities

BLUC
1.7%
PSCX
2.6%

Real Estate

BLUC
1.6%
PSCX
2.0%

Basic Materials

BLUC
1.5%
PSCX
1.9%

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

BLUC vs. PSCX — Risk / Return Rank

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

BLUC

PSCX
PSCX Risk / Return Rank: 8686
Overall Rank
PSCX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8787
Sharpe Ratio Rank
PSCX Sortino Ratio Rank: 9191
Sortino Ratio Rank
PSCX Omega Ratio Rank: 9191
Omega Ratio Rank
PSCX Calmar Ratio Rank: 7575
Calmar Ratio Rank
PSCX Martin Ratio Rank: 8888
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.

BLUC vs. PSCX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Bluemonte Large Cap Core ETF (BLUC) and Pacer Swan SOS Conservative (December) ETF (PSCX). 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.


Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.

BLUC vs. PSCX - Sharpe Ratio Comparison


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


BLUCPSCXDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.84

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

1.21

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

2.15

1.28

+0.87

Drawdowns

BLUC vs. PSCX - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BLUC drawdown since its inception was -10.69%, roughly equal to the maximum PSCX drawdown of -10.20%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BLUC and PSCX.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


BLUCPSCXDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-10.69%

-10.20%

-0.49%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-4.20%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-9.61%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-10.20%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.05%

0.00%

-1.05%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-1.52%

-1.86%

+0.34%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

0.82%

Volatility

BLUC vs. PSCX - Volatility Comparison


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


BLUCPSCXDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

0.86%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

4.21%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

12.98%

5.52%

+7.46%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

12.98%

7.07%

+5.91%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

12.98%

6.96%

+6.02%

BLUC vs. PSCX - Expense Ratio Comparison

BLUC has a 0.23% expense ratio, which is lower than PSCX's 0.75% expense ratio.


Dividends

BLUC vs. PSCX - Dividend Comparison

BLUC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.51%, while PSCX has not paid dividends to shareholders.


Frequently Asked Questions


With a correlation of 0.92, BLUC and PSCX move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

On fees, BLUC is cheaper at 0.23% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

BLUC is cheaper with a 0.23% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for PSCX.

BLUC has the higher dividend yield at 0.51%, compared with 0.00% for PSCX.

They also come from different issuers: Bluemonte and Pacer. Their fees differ too: 0.23% for BLUC and 0.75% for PSCX.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for BLUC and PSCX

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