PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
LENS vs. FLRT
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

LENS vs. FLRT - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Sarmaya Thematic ETF (LENS) and Pacer Aristotle Pacific Floating Rate High Income ETF (FLRT). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, LENS achieves a 6.15% return, which is significantly higher than FLRT's 2.60% return.


LENS

1D
0.99%
1M
4.38%
6M
-10.73%
YTD
6.15%
1Y
47.33%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
ALL TIME*
39.86%

FLRT

1D
0.16%
1M
0.58%
6M
2.28%
YTD
2.60%
1Y
5.26%
3Y*
7.95%
5Y*
6.12%
10Y*
4.79%
ALL TIME*
4.49%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Liquidity Comparison


PositionAvg. Volume Value (2W)Avg. Volume Value (1M)Avg. Volume Value (3M)
$5.46M$4.80M$4.74M
$413.47K$347.71K$437.62K

LENS vs. FLRT - Yearly Performance Comparison


Correlation

The correlation between LENS and FLRT is 0.03, meaning there was essentially no consistent relationship between their historical price movements. Each responded to its own set of market drivers.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.

0.03

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 29, 2025

0.03

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

LENS vs. FLRT — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

LENS
LENS Risk / Return Rank: 5252
Overall Rank
LENS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6464
Sharpe Ratio Rank
LENS Sortino Ratio Rank: 5151
Sortino Ratio Rank
LENS Omega Ratio Rank: 6262
Omega Ratio Rank
LENS Calmar Ratio Rank: 4747
Calmar Ratio Rank
LENS Martin Ratio Rank: 3838
Martin Ratio Rank

FLRT
FLRT Risk / Return Rank: 8989
Overall Rank
FLRT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9797
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FLRT Sortino Ratio Rank: 9797
Sortino Ratio Rank
FLRT Omega Ratio Rank: 9797
Omega Ratio Rank
FLRT Calmar Ratio Rank: 7575
Calmar Ratio Rank
FLRT Martin Ratio Rank: 7777
Martin Ratio Rank
The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

LENS vs. FLRT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Sarmaya Thematic ETF (LENS) and Pacer Aristotle Pacific Floating Rate High Income ETF (FLRT). 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.


LENSFLRTDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-1.83

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-3.22

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.30

1.78

-0.48

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.94

2.97

-1.03

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

4.51

10.89

-6.38

LENS vs. FLRT - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current LENS Sharpe Ratio is 1.70, which is lower than the FLRT Sharpe Ratio of 3.53. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of LENS and FLRT, 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...

Drawdowns

LENS vs. FLRT - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum LENS drawdown since its inception was -24.55%, which is greater than FLRT's maximum drawdown of -20.96%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LENS and FLRT.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


LENSFLRTDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-24.55%

-20.96%

-3.59%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-24.55%

-1.78%

-22.77%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-2.87%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-7.60%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-20.96%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-19.11%

0.00%

-19.11%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-5.59%

-1.39%

-4.20%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

10.53%

0.48%

+10.05%

Volatility

LENS vs. FLRT - Volatility Comparison

Sarmaya Thematic ETF (LENS) has a higher volatility of 5.48% compared to Pacer Aristotle Pacific Floating Rate High Income ETF (FLRT) at 0.31%. This indicates that LENS's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FLRT based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


LENSFLRTDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

5.48%

0.31%

+5.17%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

19.98%

1.18%

+18.80%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

28.07%

1.49%

+26.58%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

25.50%

2.30%

+23.20%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

25.50%

6.09%

+19.41%

LENS vs. FLRT - Expense Ratio Comparison

LENS has a 0.79% expense ratio, which is higher than FLRT's 0.60% expense ratio.


Dividends

LENS vs. FLRT - Dividend Comparison

LENS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.51%, less than FLRT's 6.70% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
FLRT
Pacer Aristotle Pacific Floating Rate High Income ETF
6.70%6.93%7.93%8.40%5.81%3.16%3.52%4.30%3.95%3.20%3.38%3.21%
LENS
Sarmaya Thematic ETF
1.51%1.60%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


LENS and FLRT have a correlation of 0.03, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

LENS has higher volatility (5.48%) compared to FLRT (0.31%). In terms of maximum drawdown, LENS dropped -24.55% vs FLRT's -20.96%.

On 1-year performance, LENS leads with 47.33% vs 5.26% for FLRT. On fees, FLRT is cheaper at 0.60% per year. On volatility, FLRT has been the lower-risk option at 0.31%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, LENS has performed better with a 47.33% return vs 5.26%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

FLRT is cheaper with a 0.60% expense ratio, compared with 0.79% for LENS.

FLRT has the higher dividend yield at 6.70%, compared with 1.51% for LENS.

LENS is categorized as Global Equities, while FLRT is Bank Loan. They also come from different issuers: Alpha Architect and Pacer. Their fees differ too: 0.79% for LENS and 0.60% for FLRT.

FLRT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.53 vs 1.70), 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 LENS and FLRT

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