GLBL vs. SRVR

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

GLBL (Pacer MSCI World Industry Advantage ETF) and SRVR (Pacer Benchmark Data & Infrastructure Real Estate SCTR ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - GLBL is a Global Equities fund tracking the MSCI World Ricardo Comparative Advantage Select Index, while SRVR is a REIT fund tracking the Benchmark Data & Infrastructure Real Estate SCTR Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, GLBL returned 25.78% vs 5.84% for SRVR. At a 0.46 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. GLBL charges 0.65%/yr vs 0.60%/yr for SRVR.

Performance

GLBL vs. SRVR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Pacer MSCI World Industry Advantage ETF (GLBL) and Pacer Benchmark Data & Infrastructure Real Estate SCTR ETF (SRVR). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, GLBL achieves a 8.96% return, which is significantly lower than SRVR's 17.97% return.

GLBL

• 1D: -1.70%
• 1M: -1.58%
• YTD: 8.96%
• 6M: 8.11%
• 1Y: 25.78%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

SRVR

• 1D: -1.01%
• 1M: -2.35%
• YTD: 17.97%
• 6M: 18.04%
• 1Y: 5.84%
• 3Y*: 8.93%
• 5Y*: -1.27%
• 10Y*: —

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

GLBL vs. SRVR - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
GLBL Pacer MSCI World Industry Advantage ETF	8.96%	20.14%	5.49%
SRVR Pacer Benchmark Data & Infrastructure Real Estate SCTR ETF	17.97%	-1.99%	-5.87%

Correlation

The correlation between GLBL and SRVR is 0.50, 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	0.50
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 17, 2024	0.46

The correlation between GLBL and SRVR has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.46 to 0.50 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

GLBL vs. SRVR — Risk / Return Rank

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

GLBL

GLBL Risk / Return Rank: 57
GLBL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 59
GLBL Sortino Ratio Rank: 56
GLBL Omega Ratio Rank: 58
GLBL Calmar Ratio Rank: 53
GLBL Martin Ratio Rank: 58

SRVR

SRVR Risk / Return Rank: 13
SRVR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 13
SRVR Sortino Ratio Rank: 13
SRVR Omega Ratio Rank: 13
SRVR Calmar Ratio Rank: 13
SRVR Martin Ratio Rank: 12

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.

GLBL vs. SRVR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Pacer MSCI World Industry Advantage ETF (GLBL) and Pacer Benchmark Data & Infrastructure Real Estate SCTR ETF (SRVR). 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.

	GLBL	SRVR	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.80	0.34	+1.46
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.42	0.60	+1.83
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.32	1.07	+0.25
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.36	0.40	+1.96
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	9.33	0.84	+8.49

GLBL vs. SRVR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current GLBL Sharpe Ratio is 1.80, which is higher than the SRVR Sharpe Ratio of 0.34. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of GLBL and SRVR, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

GLBL vs. SRVR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GLBL drawdown since its inception was -19.75%, smaller than the maximum SRVR drawdown of -40.99%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GLBL and SRVR.

Drawdown Indicators

	GLBL	SRVR	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-19.75%	-40.99%	+21.24%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-10.97%	-14.78%	+3.81%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-18.34%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-40.99%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-4.27%	-13.62%	+9.35%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.58%	-15.24%	+12.66%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.77%	6.94%	-4.17%

Volatility

GLBL vs. SRVR - Volatility Comparison

Pacer MSCI World Industry Advantage ETF (GLBL) has a higher volatility of 5.99% compared to Pacer Benchmark Data & Infrastructure Real Estate SCTR ETF (SRVR) at 5.66%. This indicates that GLBL's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than SRVR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	GLBL	SRVR	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.99%	5.66%	+0.33%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	11.56%	13.59%	-2.03%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	14.40%	17.29%	-2.89%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	16.77%	19.78%	-3.01%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	16.77%	21.44%	-4.67%

GLBL vs. SRVR - Expense Ratio Comparison

GLBL has a 0.65% expense ratio, which is higher than SRVR's 0.60% expense ratio.

Dividends

GLBL vs. SRVR - Dividend Comparison

GLBL's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.78%, less than SRVR's 2.59% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018
GLBL Pacer MSCI World Industry Advantage ETF	0.78%	0.86%	0.15%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
SRVR Pacer Benchmark Data & Infrastructure Real Estate SCTR ETF	2.59%	2.67%	2.00%	3.69%	1.70%	1.19%	1.59%	1.61%	2.13%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both GLBL and SRVR in my portfolio?

GLBL and SRVR have a correlation of 0.50, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, GLBL or SRVR?

GLBL has higher volatility (5.99%) compared to SRVR (5.66%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GLBL dropped -19.75% vs SRVR's -40.99%.

Which ETF is better, GLBL or SRVR?

On 1-year performance, GLBL leads with 25.78% vs 5.84% for SRVR. On fees, SRVR is cheaper at 0.60% per year. On volatility, SRVR has been the lower-risk option at 5.66%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, GLBL or SRVR?

Over the 1-year period, GLBL has performed better with a 25.78% return vs 5.84%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, GLBL or SRVR?

SRVR is cheaper with a 0.60% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for GLBL.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, GLBL or SRVR?

SRVR has the higher dividend yield at 2.59%, compared with 0.78% for GLBL.

What is the main difference between GLBL and SRVR?

GLBL is categorized as Global Equities, while SRVR is REIT. GLBL tracks MSCI World Ricardo Comparative Advantage Select Index, while SRVR tracks Benchmark Data & Infrastructure Real Estate SCTR Index. Their fees differ too: 0.65% for GLBL and 0.60% for SRVR.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

GLBL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.80 vs 0.34), 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.