CZA vs. PEXL
CZA (Invesco Zacks Mid-Cap ETF) and PEXL (Pacer US Export Leaders ETF) are both Mid Cap Blend Equities funds - CZA tracks the Zacks Mid-Cap Core Index while PEXL tracks the Pacer US Export Leaders Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, CZA returned 6.64%/yr vs 13.25%/yr for PEXL. A 0.79 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. CZA charges 0.69%/yr vs 0.60%/yr for PEXL.
Performance
CZA vs. PEXL - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, CZA achieves a 5.97% return, which is significantly lower than PEXL's 23.12% return.
CZA
- 1D
- -0.24%
- 1M
- 1.90%
- YTD
- 5.97%
- 6M
- 6.65%
- 1Y
- 13.18%
- 3Y*
- 12.55%
- 5Y*
- 6.64%
- 10Y*
- 10.10%
PEXL
- 1D
- 0.57%
- 1M
- 12.19%
- YTD
- 23.12%
- 6M
- 24.66%
- 1Y
- 53.95%
- 3Y*
- 22.51%
- 5Y*
- 13.25%
- 10Y*
- —
CZA vs. PEXL - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CZA Invesco Zacks Mid-Cap ETF | 5.97% | 8.31% | 12.14% | 7.00% | -5.91% | 27.42% | 0.35% | 32.27% | -10.50% |
PEXL Pacer US Export Leaders ETF | 23.12% | 27.33% | 5.79% | 24.40% | -20.41% | 30.12% | 25.02% | 39.86% | -17.19% |
Correlation
The correlation between CZA and PEXL is 0.71, 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 | 0.71 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.76 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.81 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 25, 2018 | 0.79 |
The correlation between CZA and PEXL shifts across timeframes, from 0.71 (1 year) to 0.81 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
CZA vs. PEXL - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
CZA
PEXL
Financial Services
-
Industrials
Healthcare
Utilities
-
Real Estate
-
Technology
Consumer Cyclical
Basic Materials
Consumer Defensive
Energy
Communication Services
-
Financial Services
CZA
PEXL
-
Industrials
CZA
PEXL
Healthcare
CZA
PEXL
Utilities
CZA
PEXL
-
Real Estate
CZA
PEXL
-
Technology
CZA
PEXL
Consumer Cyclical
CZA
PEXL
Basic Materials
CZA
PEXL
Consumer Defensive
CZA
PEXL
Energy
CZA
PEXL
Communication Services
CZA
-
PEXL
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
CZA vs. PEXL — Risk / Return Rank
CZA
PEXL
CZA vs. PEXL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco Zacks Mid-Cap ETF (CZA) and Pacer US Export Leaders ETF (PEXL). 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.
| CZA | PEXL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -2.02 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -2.41 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.18 | 1.51 | -0.32 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.44 | 4.74 | -3.31 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 5.48 | 20.42 | -14.94 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| CZA | PEXL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.04 | 3.05 | -2.02 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.41 | 0.61 | -0.20 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.53 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.48 | 0.65 | -0.18 |
Drawdowns
CZA vs. PEXL - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CZA drawdown since its inception was -53.20%, which is greater than PEXL's maximum drawdown of -36.76%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CZA and PEXL.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| CZA | PEXL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -53.20% | -36.76% | -16.44% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -9.21% | -11.43% | +2.22% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -18.92% | -24.72% | +5.80% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -18.92% | -30.44% | +11.52% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -46.18% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.78% | 0.00% | -0.78% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -6.88% | -6.72% | -0.16% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.41% | 2.65% | -0.24% |
Volatility
CZA vs. PEXL - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Invesco Zacks Mid-Cap ETF (CZA) is 3.13%, while Pacer US Export Leaders ETF (PEXL) has a volatility of 5.25%. This indicates that CZA experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than PEXL based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| CZA | PEXL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 3.13% | 5.25% | -2.12% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 9.30% | 13.10% | -3.80% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 12.78% | 17.80% | -5.02% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 16.14% | 21.86% | -5.72% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 19.28% | 24.04% | -4.76% |
CZA vs. PEXL - Expense Ratio Comparison
CZA has a 0.69% expense ratio, which is higher than PEXL's 0.60% expense ratio.
Dividends
CZA vs. PEXL - Dividend Comparison
CZA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.47%, more than PEXL's 0.34% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CZA Invesco Zacks Mid-Cap ETF | 1.47% | 1.56% | 1.27% | 1.36% | 1.71% | 0.89% | 1.42% | 1.40% | 1.27% | 1.10% | 1.87% | 1.37% |
PEXL Pacer US Export Leaders ETF | 0.34% | 0.44% | 0.48% | 0.48% | 0.60% | 0.22% | 0.48% | 0.49% | 0.29% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
CZA and PEXL have a correlation of 0.71, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
PEXL has higher volatility (5.25%) compared to CZA (3.13%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CZA dropped -53.20% vs PEXL's -36.76%.
On 5-year performance, PEXL leads with 13.25% vs 6.64% for CZA. On fees, PEXL is cheaper at 0.60% per year. On volatility, CZA has been the lower-risk option at 3.13%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 5-year period, PEXL has performed better with a 13.25% return vs 6.64%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
PEXL is cheaper with a 0.60% expense ratio, compared with 0.69% for CZA.
CZA has the higher dividend yield at 1.47%, compared with 0.34% for PEXL.
CZA tracks Zacks Mid-Cap Core Index, while PEXL tracks Pacer US Export Leaders Index. They also come from different issuers: Invesco and Pacer. Their fees differ too: 0.69% for CZA and 0.60% for PEXL.
PEXL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.05 vs 1.04), 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.
Find the right allocation for CZA and PEXL
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