CZAR vs. PSCX
CZAR (Themes Natural Monopoly ETF) and PSCX (Pacer Swan SOS Conservative (December) ETF) are both Large Cap Blend Equities funds. CZAR is passively managed, while PSCX is actively managed. Over the past year, CZAR returned 0.92% vs 14.18% for PSCX. A 0.61 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. CZAR charges 0.35%/yr vs 0.75%/yr for PSCX.
Performance
CZAR vs. PSCX - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, CZAR achieves a -3.66% return, which is significantly lower than PSCX's 4.46% return.
CZAR
- 1D
- -0.36%
- 1M
- -3.86%
- YTD
- -3.66%
- 6M
- -3.68%
- 1Y
- 0.92%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
PSCX
- 1D
- -0.49%
- 1M
- -0.08%
- YTD
- 4.46%
- 6M
- 4.60%
- 1Y
- 14.18%
- 3Y*
- 12.23%
- 5Y*
- 8.22%
- 10Y*
- —
CZAR vs. PSCX - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
CZAR Themes Natural Monopoly ETF | -3.66% | 13.32% | 10.92% | 3.83% |
PSCX Pacer Swan SOS Conservative (December) ETF | 4.46% | 12.08% | 13.27% | 0.50% |
Correlation
The correlation between CZAR and PSCX is 0.64, 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 | 0.64 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 13, 2023 | 0.61 |
The correlation between CZAR and PSCX has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.61 to 0.64 - a consistent structural relationship.
CZAR vs. PSCX - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
CZAR
PSCX
Industrials
Technology
Financial Services
Healthcare
Consumer Cyclical
Consumer Defensive
Basic Materials
Energy
Utilities
Communication Services
Real Estate
-
Industrials
CZAR
PSCX
Technology
CZAR
PSCX
Financial Services
CZAR
PSCX
Healthcare
CZAR
PSCX
Consumer Cyclical
CZAR
PSCX
Consumer Defensive
CZAR
PSCX
Basic Materials
CZAR
PSCX
Energy
CZAR
PSCX
Utilities
CZAR
PSCX
Communication Services
CZAR
PSCX
Real Estate
CZAR
-
PSCX
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
CZAR vs. PSCX — Risk / Return Rank
CZAR
PSCX
CZAR vs. PSCX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Themes Natural Monopoly ETF (CZAR) 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.
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.
| CZAR | PSCX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -2.45 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -3.55 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.02 | 1.51 | -0.49 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.10 | 3.39 | -3.29 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 0.29 | 17.03 | -16.74 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
CZAR vs. PSCX - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CZAR drawdown since its inception was -13.38%, which is greater than PSCX's maximum drawdown of -10.20%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CZAR and PSCX.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| CZAR | PSCX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -13.38% | -10.20% | -3.18% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -9.54% | -4.20% | -5.34% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -9.61% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -10.20% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -6.32% | -0.75% | -5.57% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -2.23% | -1.85% | -0.38% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.23% | 0.83% | +2.40% |
Volatility
CZAR vs. PSCX - Volatility Comparison
Themes Natural Monopoly ETF (CZAR) has a higher volatility of 2.88% compared to Pacer Swan SOS Conservative (December) ETF (PSCX) at 1.79%. This indicates that CZAR's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than PSCX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| CZAR | PSCX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 2.88% | 1.79% | +1.09% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 9.96% | 4.52% | +5.44% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 12.13% | 5.65% | +6.48% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 14.98% | 7.11% | +7.87% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 14.98% | 6.97% | +8.01% |
CZAR vs. PSCX - Expense Ratio Comparison
CZAR has a 0.35% expense ratio, which is lower than PSCX's 0.75% expense ratio.
Dividends
CZAR vs. PSCX - Dividend Comparison
CZAR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.53%, while PSCX has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 |
|---|---|---|---|
CZAR Themes Natural Monopoly ETF | 1.53% | 1.47% | 0.94% |
PSCX Pacer Swan SOS Conservative (December) ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
CZAR and PSCX have a correlation of 0.64, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
CZAR has higher volatility (2.88%) compared to PSCX (1.79%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CZAR dropped -13.38% vs PSCX's -10.20%.
On 1-year performance, PSCX leads with 14.18% vs 0.92% for CZAR. On fees, CZAR is cheaper at 0.35% per year. On volatility, PSCX has been the lower-risk option at 1.79%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, PSCX has performed better with a 14.18% return vs 0.92%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
CZAR is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for PSCX.
CZAR has the higher dividend yield at 1.53%, compared with 0.00% for PSCX.
They also come from different issuers: Themes and Pacer. Their fees differ too: 0.35% for CZAR and 0.75% for PSCX.
PSCX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.53 vs 0.08), 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 CZAR 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