FOWF vs. TRFK

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

FOWF (Pacer Solactive Whitney Future of Warfare ETF) and TRFK (Pacer Data and Digital Revolution ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - FOWF is a Industrials Equities fund tracking the Solactive Whitney Future of Warfare Index, while TRFK is a Technology Equities fund tracking the Pacer Data Transmission and Communication Revolution Index - Benchmark TR Net. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, FOWF returned 22.10% vs 103.92% for TRFK. A 0.58 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. FOWF charges 0.49%/yr vs 0.60%/yr for TRFK.

Performance

FOWF vs. TRFK - Performance Comparison

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FOWF achieves a 9.44% return, which is significantly lower than TRFK's 69.94% return.

FOWF

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

TRFK

• 1D: -0.06%
• 1M: 31.98%
• YTD: 69.94%
• 6M: 62.01%
• 1Y: 103.92%
• 3Y*: 54.15%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

FOWF vs. TRFK - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
FOWF Pacer Solactive Whitney Future of Warfare ETF	9.44%	29.15%	0.39%
TRFK Pacer Data and Digital Revolution ETF	69.94%	26.81%	0.06%

Correlation

The correlation between FOWF and TRFK is 0.54, 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	0.54
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 19, 2024	0.58

The correlation between FOWF and TRFK has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.54 to 0.58 - a consistent structural relationship.

FOWF vs. TRFK - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	FOWF	TRFK
Industrials	62.2%	8.3%
Technology	29.2%	91.8%
Communication Services	5.8%	-
Consumer Cyclical	2.0%	-
Basic Materials	0.8%	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Energy	-	-
Financial Services	-	-
Healthcare	-	-
Real Estate	-	-
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

FOWF vs. TRFK — Risk / Return Rank

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

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

TRFK

TRFK Risk / Return Rank: 86
TRFK Sharpe Ratio Rank: 94
TRFK Sortino Ratio Rank: 91
TRFK Omega Ratio Rank: 87
TRFK Calmar Ratio Rank: 89
TRFK Martin Ratio Rank: 69

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. TRFK - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Pacer Solactive Whitney Future of Warfare ETF (FOWF) and Pacer Data and Digital Revolution ETF (TRFK). 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.

	FOWF	TRFK	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.59	3.78	-2.19
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.39	4.39	-1.99
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.28	1.55	-0.28
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.20	5.34	-3.14
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	7.02	12.82	-5.81
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

FOWF vs. TRFK - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FOWF Sharpe Ratio is 1.59, which is lower than the TRFK Sharpe Ratio of 3.78. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FOWF and TRFK, 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

	FOWF	TRFK	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.59	3.78	-2.19
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.63	1.58	+0.05

Drawdowns

FOWF vs. TRFK - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FOWF drawdown since its inception was -12.29%, smaller than the maximum TRFK drawdown of -29.06%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FOWF and TRFK.

Drawdown Indicators

	FOWF	TRFK	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-12.29%	-29.06%	+16.77%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-10.08%	-19.56%	+9.48%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-29.06%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.81%	-0.06%	-2.75%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.05%	-6.04%	+3.99%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.16%	8.13%	-4.97%

Volatility

FOWF vs. TRFK - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Pacer Solactive Whitney Future of Warfare ETF (FOWF) is 4.80%, while Pacer Data and Digital Revolution ETF (TRFK) has a volatility of 9.93%. This indicates that FOWF experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than TRFK based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FOWF	TRFK	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.80%	9.93%	-5.13%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	11.62%	21.73%	-10.11%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	13.94%	27.70%	-13.76%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	16.89%	28.91%	-12.02%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	16.89%	28.91%	-12.02%

FOWF vs. TRFK - Expense Ratio Comparison

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

Dividends

FOWF vs. TRFK - Dividend Comparison

FOWF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.73%, more than TRFK's 0.01% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022
FOWF Pacer Solactive Whitney Future of Warfare ETF	0.73%	0.79%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
TRFK Pacer Data and Digital Revolution ETF	0.01%	0.01%	0.40%	0.20%	0.56%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FOWF and TRFK in my portfolio?

FOWF and TRFK have a correlation of 0.54, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, FOWF or TRFK?

TRFK has higher volatility (9.93%) compared to FOWF (4.80%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FOWF dropped -12.29% vs TRFK's -29.06%.

Which ETF is better, FOWF or TRFK?

On 1-year performance, TRFK leads with 103.92% 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.

Which ETF has performed better, FOWF or TRFK?

Over the 1-year period, TRFK has performed better with a 103.92% return vs 22.10%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FOWF or TRFK?

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

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

FOWF has the higher dividend yield at 0.73%, compared with 0.01% for TRFK.

What is the main difference between FOWF and TRFK?

FOWF is categorized as Industrials Equities, while TRFK is Technology Equities. FOWF tracks Solactive Whitney Future of Warfare Index, while TRFK tracks Pacer Data Transmission and Communication Revolution Index - Benchmark TR Net. Their fees differ too: 0.49% for FOWF and 0.60% for TRFK.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

TRFK currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.78 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.