FOPC vs. PSQO

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

FOPC (Frontier Asset Opportunistic Credit ETF) and PSQO (Palmer Square Credit Opportunities ETF) are both Multisector Bonds funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, FOPC returned 4.70% vs 5.72% for PSQO. At a 0.15 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. FOPC charges 0.87%/yr vs 0.52%/yr for PSQO.

Performance

FOPC vs. PSQO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Frontier Asset Opportunistic Credit ETF (FOPC) and Palmer Square Credit Opportunities ETF (PSQO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FOPC achieves a 0.46% return, which is significantly lower than PSQO's 1.63% return.

FOPC

• 1D: -0.18%
• 1M: 0.20%
• YTD: 0.46%
• 6M: 0.43%
• 1Y: 4.70%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

PSQO

• 1D: -0.17%
• 1M: 0.53%
• YTD: 1.63%
• 6M: 2.13%
• 1Y: 5.72%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

FOPC vs. PSQO - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
FOPC Frontier Asset Opportunistic Credit ETF	0.46%	6.54%	-0.00%
PSQO Palmer Square Credit Opportunities ETF	1.63%	7.05%	0.24%

Correlation

The correlation between FOPC and PSQO is 0.15, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.15
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 23, 2024	0.16

Return for Risk

FOPC vs. PSQO — Risk / Return Rank

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

FOPC

FOPC Risk / Return Rank: 47
FOPC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 48
FOPC Sortino Ratio Rank: 51
FOPC Omega Ratio Rank: 48
FOPC Calmar Ratio Rank: 45
FOPC Martin Ratio Rank: 45

PSQO

PSQO Risk / Return Rank: 96
PSQO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 94
PSQO Sortino Ratio Rank: 97
PSQO Omega Ratio Rank: 97
PSQO Calmar Ratio Rank: 96
PSQO Martin Ratio Rank: 96

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.

FOPC vs. PSQO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Frontier Asset Opportunistic Credit ETF (FOPC) and Palmer Square Credit Opportunities ETF (PSQO). 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.

	FOPC	PSQO	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.65	3.71	-2.06
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.45	6.38	-3.93
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.30	1.85	-0.56
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.16	8.69	-6.52
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	7.33	35.71	-28.39
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

FOPC vs. PSQO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FOPC Sharpe Ratio is 1.65, which is lower than the PSQO Sharpe Ratio of 3.71. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FOPC and PSQO, 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

	FOPC	PSQO	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.65	3.71	-2.06
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.57	3.13	-1.56

Drawdowns

FOPC vs. PSQO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FOPC drawdown since its inception was -2.18%, which is greater than PSQO's maximum drawdown of -0.76%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FOPC and PSQO.

Drawdown Indicators

	FOPC	PSQO	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-2.18%	-0.76%	-1.42%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-2.18%	-0.66%	-1.52%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.97%	-0.17%	-0.80%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.41%	-0.11%	-0.30%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.64%	0.16%	+0.48%

Volatility

FOPC vs. PSQO - Volatility Comparison

Frontier Asset Opportunistic Credit ETF (FOPC) has a higher volatility of 1.03% compared to Palmer Square Credit Opportunities ETF (PSQO) at 0.57%. This indicates that FOPC's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than PSQO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FOPC	PSQO	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.03%	0.57%	+0.46%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	2.19%	1.27%	+0.92%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.86%	1.55%	+1.31%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	3.10%	2.00%	+1.10%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	3.10%	2.00%	+1.10%

FOPC vs. PSQO - Expense Ratio Comparison

FOPC has a 0.87% expense ratio, which is higher than PSQO's 0.52% expense ratio.

Dividends

FOPC vs. PSQO - Dividend Comparison

FOPC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.27%, more than PSQO's 4.13% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024
FOPC Frontier Asset Opportunistic Credit ETF	4.27%	4.42%	0.06%
PSQO Palmer Square Credit Opportunities ETF	4.13%	4.45%	1.40%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FOPC and PSQO in my portfolio?

FOPC and PSQO have a correlation of 0.15, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, FOPC or PSQO?

FOPC has higher volatility (1.03%) compared to PSQO (0.57%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FOPC dropped -2.18% vs PSQO's -0.76%.

Which ETF is better, FOPC or PSQO?

On 1-year performance, PSQO leads with 5.72% vs 4.70% for FOPC. On fees, PSQO is cheaper at 0.52% per year. On volatility, PSQO has been the lower-risk option at 0.57%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FOPC or PSQO?

Over the 1-year period, PSQO has performed better with a 5.72% return vs 4.70%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FOPC or PSQO?

PSQO is cheaper with a 0.52% expense ratio, compared with 0.87% for FOPC.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, FOPC or PSQO?

FOPC has the higher dividend yield at 4.27%, compared with 4.13% for PSQO.

What is the main difference between FOPC and PSQO?

They also come from different issuers: Frontier and Palmer Square. Their fees differ too: 0.87% for FOPC and 0.52% for PSQO.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

PSQO currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.71 vs 1.65), 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.