FAPR vs. PSCW
FAPR (FT Vest U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - April) and PSCW (Pacer Swan SOS Conservative (April) ETF) are both Defined Outcome funds. FAPR is passively managed, while PSCW is actively managed. Over the past 5 years, FAPR returned 8.58%/yr vs 6.97%/yr for PSCW. Their correlation of 0.88 suggests significant overlap in exposure. FAPR charges 0.85%/yr vs 0.61%/yr for PSCW.
Performance
FAPR vs. PSCW - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, FAPR achieves a 4.22% return, which is significantly lower than PSCW's 7.04% return.
FAPR
- 1D
- -0.61%
- 1M
- -0.33%
- YTD
- 4.22%
- 6M
- 4.27%
- 1Y
- 11.10%
- 3Y*
- 12.75%
- 5Y*
- 8.58%
- 10Y*
- —
PSCW
- 1D
- -0.33%
- 1M
- 0.07%
- YTD
- 7.04%
- 6M
- 6.91%
- 1Y
- 13.63%
- 3Y*
- 11.23%
- 5Y*
- 6.97%
- 10Y*
- —
FAPR vs. PSCW - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FAPR FT Vest U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - April | 4.22% | 7.58% | 18.14% | 19.50% | -10.33% | 8.50% |
PSCW Pacer Swan SOS Conservative (April) ETF | 7.04% | 6.56% | 12.95% | 11.44% | -5.52% | 4.68% |
Correlation
The correlation between FAPR and PSCW is 0.77, 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 | 0.77 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.86 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.88 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 19, 2021 | 0.88 |
The correlation between FAPR and PSCW shifts across timeframes, from 0.77 (1 year) to 0.88 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
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
FAPR vs. PSCW — Risk / Return Rank
FAPR
PSCW
FAPR vs. PSCW - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for FT Vest U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - April (FAPR) and Pacer Swan SOS Conservative (April) ETF (PSCW). 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.
| FAPR | PSCW | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -1.15 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -2.36 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.57 | 1.82 | -0.25 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 5.04 | 9.15 | -4.11 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 32.27 | 44.03 | -11.76 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
FAPR vs. PSCW - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum FAPR drawdown since its inception was -15.96%, which is greater than PSCW's maximum drawdown of -11.89%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FAPR and PSCW.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| FAPR | PSCW | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -15.96% | -11.89% | -4.07% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -2.21% | -1.50% | -0.71% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -11.64% | -11.89% | +0.25% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -15.96% | -11.89% | -4.07% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -1.15% | -0.58% | -0.57% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -2.69% | -2.16% | -0.53% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 0.34% | 0.31% | +0.03% |
Volatility
FAPR vs. PSCW - Volatility Comparison
FT Vest U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - April (FAPR) has a higher volatility of 2.54% compared to Pacer Swan SOS Conservative (April) ETF (PSCW) at 1.45%. This indicates that FAPR's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than PSCW based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| FAPR | PSCW | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 2.54% | 1.45% | +1.09% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 3.71% | 2.77% | +0.94% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 4.37% | 3.71% | +0.66% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 10.53% | 7.66% | +2.87% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 10.43% | 7.58% | +2.85% |
FAPR vs. PSCW - Expense Ratio Comparison
FAPR has a 0.85% expense ratio, which is higher than PSCW's 0.61% expense ratio.
Dividends
FAPR vs. PSCW - Dividend Comparison
Neither FAPR nor PSCW has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
FAPR and PSCW have a correlation of 0.77, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
FAPR has higher volatility (2.54%) compared to PSCW (1.45%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FAPR dropped -15.96% vs PSCW's -11.89%.
On 5-year performance, FAPR leads with 8.58% vs 6.97% for PSCW. On fees, PSCW is cheaper at 0.61% per year. On volatility, PSCW has been the lower-risk option at 1.45%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 5-year period, FAPR has performed better with a 8.58% return vs 6.97%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
PSCW is cheaper with a 0.61% expense ratio, compared with 0.85% for FAPR.
FAPR and PSCW have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.
They also come from different issuers: FT Vest and Pacer. Their fees differ too: 0.85% for FAPR and 0.61% for PSCW.
PSCW currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.71 vs 2.56), 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 FAPR and PSCW
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