EFRA vs. FOWF

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

EFRA (iShares Environmental Infrastructure and Industrials ETF) and FOWF (Pacer Solactive Whitney Future of Warfare ETF) are both Industrials Equities funds - EFRA tracks the FTSE Green Revenues Select Infrastructure and Industrials Index while FOWF tracks the Solactive Whitney Future of Warfare Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, EFRA returned 10.28% vs 22.10% for FOWF. A 0.67 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. EFRA charges 0.47%/yr vs 0.49%/yr for FOWF.

Performance

EFRA vs. FOWF - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares Environmental Infrastructure and Industrials ETF (EFRA) and Pacer Solactive Whitney Future of Warfare ETF (FOWF). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, EFRA achieves a 4.96% return, which is significantly lower than FOWF's 9.44% return.

EFRA

• 1D: 0.40%
• 1M: -0.88%
• YTD: 4.96%
• 6M: 4.97%
• 1Y: 10.28%
• 3Y*: 11.21%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

FOWF

• 1D: -1.88%
• 1M: 3.45%
• YTD: 9.44%
• 6M: 12.30%
• 1Y: 22.10%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

EFRA vs. FOWF - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
EFRA iShares Environmental Infrastructure and Industrials ETF	4.96%	13.76%	-0.15%
FOWF Pacer Solactive Whitney Future of Warfare ETF	9.44%	29.15%	0.39%

Correlation

The correlation between EFRA and FOWF is 0.59, 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	0.59
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 19, 2024	0.67

The correlation between EFRA and FOWF has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.59 to 0.67 - a consistent structural relationship.

EFRA vs. FOWF - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	EFRA	FOWF
Industrials	61.8%	62.2%
Utilities	24.1%	-
Consumer Cyclical	6.3%	2.0%
Basic Materials	4.4%	0.8%
Technology	2.7%	29.2%
Communication Services	-	5.8%
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Energy	-	-
Financial Services	-	-
Healthcare	-	-
Real Estate	-	-

Return for Risk

EFRA vs. FOWF — Risk / Return Rank

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

EFRA

EFRA Risk / Return Rank: 21
EFRA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 21
EFRA Sortino Ratio Rank: 21
EFRA Omega Ratio Rank: 21
EFRA Calmar Ratio Rank: 21
EFRA Martin Ratio Rank: 22

FOWF

FOWF Risk / Return Rank: 46
FOWF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 46
FOWF Sortino Ratio Rank: 50
FOWF Omega Ratio Rank: 44
FOWF Calmar Ratio Rank: 45
FOWF Martin Ratio Rank: 44

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.

EFRA vs. FOWF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Environmental Infrastructure and Industrials ETF (EFRA) and Pacer Solactive Whitney Future of Warfare ETF (FOWF). 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.

	EFRA	FOWF	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.74	1.59	-0.86
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.14	2.39	-1.26
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.13	1.28	-0.14
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.92	2.20	-1.28
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	2.67	7.02	-4.35
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

EFRA vs. FOWF - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EFRA Sharpe Ratio is 0.74, which is lower than the FOWF Sharpe Ratio of 1.59. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EFRA and FOWF, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	EFRA	FOWF	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.74	1.59	-0.86
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.90	1.63	-0.73

Drawdowns

EFRA vs. FOWF - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EFRA drawdown since its inception was -16.25%, which is greater than FOWF's maximum drawdown of -12.29%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EFRA and FOWF.

Drawdown Indicators

	EFRA	FOWF	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-16.25%	-12.29%	-3.96%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-11.20%	-10.08%	-1.12%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-16.25%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-6.98%	-2.81%	-4.17%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.63%	-2.05%	-1.58%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.85%	3.16%	+0.69%

Volatility

EFRA vs. FOWF - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares Environmental Infrastructure and Industrials ETF (EFRA) is 4.37%, while Pacer Solactive Whitney Future of Warfare ETF (FOWF) has a volatility of 4.80%. This indicates that EFRA experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FOWF based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	EFRA	FOWF	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.37%	4.80%	-0.43%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	11.21%	11.62%	-0.41%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	14.02%	13.94%	+0.08%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	15.51%	16.89%	-1.38%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	15.51%	16.89%	-1.38%

EFRA vs. FOWF - Expense Ratio Comparison

EFRA has a 0.47% expense ratio, which is lower than FOWF's 0.49% expense ratio.

Dividends

EFRA vs. FOWF - Dividend Comparison

EFRA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.13%, more than FOWF's 0.73% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022
EFRA iShares Environmental Infrastructure and Industrials ETF	4.13%	4.34%	3.79%	1.85%	0.14%
FOWF Pacer Solactive Whitney Future of Warfare ETF	0.73%	0.79%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both EFRA and FOWF in my portfolio?

EFRA and FOWF have a correlation of 0.59, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, EFRA or FOWF?

FOWF has higher volatility (4.80%) compared to EFRA (4.37%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EFRA dropped -16.25% vs FOWF's -12.29%.

Which ETF is better, EFRA or FOWF?

On 1-year performance, FOWF leads with 22.10% vs 10.28% for EFRA. On fees, EFRA is cheaper at 0.47% per year. On volatility, EFRA has been the lower-risk option at 4.37%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, EFRA or FOWF?

Over the 1-year period, FOWF has performed better with a 22.10% return vs 10.28%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, EFRA or FOWF?

EFRA is cheaper with a 0.47% expense ratio, compared with 0.49% for FOWF.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, EFRA or FOWF?

EFRA has the higher dividend yield at 4.13%, compared with 0.73% for FOWF.

What is the main difference between EFRA and FOWF?

EFRA tracks FTSE Green Revenues Select Infrastructure and Industrials Index, while FOWF tracks Solactive Whitney Future of Warfare Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Pacer. Their fees differ too: 0.47% for EFRA and 0.49% for FOWF.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FOWF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.59 vs 0.74), 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.