PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
FOWF vs. SEA
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

FOWF vs. SEA - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Pacer Solactive Whitney Future of Warfare ETF (FOWF) and U.S. Global Sea to Sky Cargo ETF (SEA). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FOWF achieves a 9.44% return, which is significantly lower than SEA's 20.79% return.


FOWF

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

SEA

1D
-0.80%
1M
0.23%
YTD
20.79%
6M
21.12%
1Y
30.09%
3Y*
18.52%
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

FOWF vs. SEA - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024
FOWF
Pacer Solactive Whitney Future of Warfare ETF
9.44%29.15%0.39%
SEA
U.S. Global Sea to Sky Cargo ETF
20.79%16.78%4.84%

Correlation

The correlation between FOWF and SEA is 0.43, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.43

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 19, 2024

0.45

FOWF vs. SEA - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
FOWF
SEA

Industrials

62.2%
82.7%

Technology

29.2%
-1.6%

Communication Services

5.8%
0.0%

Consumer Cyclical

2.0%

-

Basic Materials

0.8%

-

Consumer Defensive

-

-

Energy

-

17.3%

Financial Services

-

-

Healthcare

-

-

Real Estate

-

-

Utilities

-

-

Industrials

FOWF
62.2%
SEA
82.7%

Technology

FOWF
29.2%
SEA
-1.6%

Communication Services

FOWF
5.8%
SEA
0.0%

Consumer Cyclical

FOWF
2.0%
SEA

-

Basic Materials

FOWF
0.8%
SEA

-

Consumer Defensive

FOWF

-

SEA

-

Energy

FOWF

-

SEA
17.3%

Financial Services

FOWF

-

SEA

-

Healthcare

FOWF

-

SEA

-

Real Estate

FOWF

-

SEA

-

Utilities

FOWF

-

SEA

-

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

FOWF vs. SEA — Risk / Return Rank

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

FOWF
FOWF Risk / Return Rank: 4646
Overall Rank
FOWF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4646
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FOWF Sortino Ratio Rank: 5050
Sortino Ratio Rank
FOWF Omega Ratio Rank: 4444
Omega Ratio Rank
FOWF Calmar Ratio Rank: 4545
Calmar Ratio Rank
FOWF Martin Ratio Rank: 4444
Martin Ratio Rank

SEA
SEA Risk / Return Rank: 5656
Overall Rank
SEA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5454
Sharpe Ratio Rank
SEA Sortino Ratio Rank: 5454
Sortino Ratio Rank
SEA Omega Ratio Rank: 5151
Omega Ratio Rank
SEA Calmar Ratio Rank: 5757
Calmar Ratio Rank
SEA Martin Ratio Rank: 6464
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

FOWF vs. SEA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Pacer Solactive Whitney Future of Warfare ETF (FOWF) and U.S. Global Sea to Sky Cargo ETF (SEA). 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.


FOWFSEADifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.26

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.22

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.28

1.32

-0.04

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.20

2.83

-0.63

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

7.02

11.52

-4.50

FOWF vs. SEA - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FOWF Sharpe Ratio is 1.59, which is comparable to the SEA Sharpe Ratio of 1.86. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FOWF and SEA, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


FOWFSEADifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.59

1.86

-0.26

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

1.63

0.39

+1.24

Drawdowns

FOWF vs. SEA - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FOWF drawdown since its inception was -12.29%, smaller than the maximum SEA drawdown of -39.53%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FOWF and SEA.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


FOWFSEADifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-12.29%

-39.53%

+27.24%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-10.08%

-10.67%

+0.59%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-32.42%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-2.81%

-3.07%

+0.26%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-2.05%

-14.31%

+12.26%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.16%

2.62%

+0.54%

Volatility

FOWF vs. SEA - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Pacer Solactive Whitney Future of Warfare ETF (FOWF) is 4.80%, while U.S. Global Sea to Sky Cargo ETF (SEA) has a volatility of 5.17%. This indicates that FOWF experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than SEA based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


FOWFSEADifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.80%

5.17%

-0.37%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

11.62%

12.01%

-0.39%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

13.94%

16.28%

-2.34%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

16.89%

21.67%

-4.78%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

16.89%

21.67%

-4.78%

FOWF vs. SEA - Expense Ratio Comparison

FOWF has a 0.49% expense ratio, which is lower than SEA's 0.60% expense ratio.


Dividends

FOWF vs. SEA - Dividend Comparison

FOWF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.73%, less than SEA's 5.59% yield.


PositionTTM2025202420232022
FOWF
Pacer Solactive Whitney Future of Warfare ETF
0.73%0.79%0.00%0.00%0.00%
SEA
U.S. Global Sea to Sky Cargo ETF
5.59%6.76%18.47%9.85%18.73%

Frequently Asked Questions


FOWF and SEA have a correlation of 0.43, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

SEA has higher volatility (5.17%) compared to FOWF (4.80%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FOWF dropped -12.29% vs SEA's -39.53%.

On 1-year performance, SEA leads with 30.09% vs 22.10% for FOWF. On fees, FOWF is cheaper at 0.49% per year. On volatility, FOWF has been the lower-risk option at 4.80%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, SEA has performed better with a 30.09% return vs 22.10%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

FOWF is cheaper with a 0.49% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for SEA.

SEA has the higher dividend yield at 5.59%, compared with 0.73% for FOWF.

FOWF tracks Solactive Whitney Future of Warfare Index, while SEA tracks U.S. Global Sea to Sky Cargo Index - Benchmark TR Gross. They also come from different issuers: Pacer and US Global. Their fees differ too: 0.49% for FOWF and 0.60% for SEA.

SEA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.86 vs 1.59), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for FOWF and SEA

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