NANC vs. PSCX

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

NANC (Unusual Whales Subversive Democratic Trading ETF) and PSCX (Pacer Swan SOS Conservative (December) ETF) are both Large Cap Blend Equities funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past 3 years, NANC returned 23.86%/yr vs 12.85%/yr for PSCX. Their correlation of 0.88 suggests significant overlap in exposure. NANC charges 0.72%/yr vs 0.75%/yr for PSCX.

Performance

NANC vs. PSCX - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Unusual Whales Subversive Democratic Trading ETF (NANC) and Pacer Swan SOS Conservative (December) ETF (PSCX). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, NANC achieves a 10.06% return, which is significantly higher than PSCX's 5.11% return.

NANC

• 1D: 0.53%
• 1M: 5.83%
• YTD: 10.06%
• 6M: 9.47%
• 1Y: 26.56%
• 3Y*: 23.86%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

PSCX

• 1D: -0.12%
• 1M: 2.00%
• YTD: 5.11%
• 6M: 5.98%
• 1Y: 15.49%
• 3Y*: 12.85%
• 5Y*: 8.46%
• 10Y*: —

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

NANC vs. PSCX - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
NANC Unusual Whales Subversive Democratic Trading ETF	10.06%	18.54%	26.83%	20.79%
PSCX Pacer Swan SOS Conservative (December) ETF	5.11%	12.08%	13.27%	11.14%

Correlation

The correlation between NANC and PSCX is 0.90, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.90
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.87
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 8, 2023	0.88

The correlation between NANC and PSCX has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.87 to 0.90 - a consistent structural relationship.

NANC vs. PSCX - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	NANC	PSCX
Technology	41.5%	33.2%
Communication Services	15.1%	10.3%
Healthcare	10.5%	9.6%
Consumer Cyclical	9.2%	10.0%
Financial Services	7.7%	12.5%
Consumer Defensive	7.6%	5.4%
Industrials	5.5%	8.4%
Basic Materials	2.2%	1.9%
Utilities	0.6%	2.6%
Energy	-	4.2%
Real Estate	-	2.0%

Return for Risk

NANC vs. PSCX — Risk / Return Rank

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

NANC

NANC Risk / Return Rank: 55
NANC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 60
NANC Sortino Ratio Rank: 59
NANC Omega Ratio Rank: 58
NANC Calmar Ratio Rank: 45
NANC Martin Ratio Rank: 54

PSCX

PSCX Risk / Return Rank: 85
PSCX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 85
PSCX Sortino Ratio Rank: 90
PSCX Omega Ratio Rank: 90
PSCX Calmar Ratio Rank: 74
PSCX Martin Ratio Rank: 87

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.

NANC vs. PSCX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Unusual Whales Subversive Democratic Trading ETF (NANC) and Pacer Swan SOS Conservative (December) ETF (PSCX). 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.

	NANC	PSCX	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.96	2.82	-0.85
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.72	4.22	-1.51
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.35	1.58	-0.23
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.18	3.70	-1.51
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	9.04	18.94	-9.91
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

NANC vs. PSCX - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current NANC Sharpe Ratio is 1.96, which is lower than the PSCX Sharpe Ratio of 2.82. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of NANC and PSCX, 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

	NANC	PSCX	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.96	2.82	-0.85
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	1.20	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.39	1.27	+0.12

Drawdowns

NANC vs. PSCX - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum NANC drawdown since its inception was -20.94%, which is greater than PSCX's maximum drawdown of -10.20%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for NANC and PSCX.

Drawdown Indicators

	NANC	PSCX	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-20.94%	-10.20%	-10.74%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-12.21%	-4.20%	-8.01%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-20.94%	-9.61%	-11.33%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-10.20%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.82%	-0.12%	-0.70%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.67%	-1.87%	-0.80%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.95%	0.82%	+2.13%

Volatility

NANC vs. PSCX - Volatility Comparison

Unusual Whales Subversive Democratic Trading ETF (NANC) has a higher volatility of 3.62% compared to Pacer Swan SOS Conservative (December) ETF (PSCX) at 0.89%. This indicates that NANC's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than PSCX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	NANC	PSCX	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.62%	0.89%	+2.73%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	10.39%	4.21%	+6.18%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	13.59%	5.53%	+8.06%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	16.72%	7.07%	+9.65%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	16.72%	6.96%	+9.76%

NANC vs. PSCX - Expense Ratio Comparison

NANC has a 0.72% expense ratio, which is lower than PSCX's 0.75% expense ratio.

Dividends

NANC vs. PSCX - Dividend Comparison

NANC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.19%, while PSCX has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023
NANC Unusual Whales Subversive Democratic Trading ETF	0.19%	0.21%	0.20%	0.94%
PSCX Pacer Swan SOS Conservative (December) ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both NANC and PSCX in my portfolio?

NANC and PSCX have a correlation of 0.90, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, NANC or PSCX?

NANC has higher volatility (3.62%) compared to PSCX (0.89%). In terms of maximum drawdown, NANC dropped -20.94% vs PSCX's -10.20%.

Which ETF is better, NANC or PSCX?

On 3-year performance, NANC leads with 23.86% vs 12.85% for PSCX. On fees, NANC is cheaper at 0.72% per year. On volatility, PSCX has been the lower-risk option at 0.89%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, NANC or PSCX?

Over the 3-year period, NANC has performed better with a 23.86% return vs 12.85%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, NANC or PSCX?

NANC is cheaper with a 0.72% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for PSCX.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, NANC or PSCX?

NANC has the higher dividend yield at 0.19%, compared with 0.00% for PSCX.

What is the main difference between NANC and PSCX?

They also come from different issuers: Subversive and Pacer. Their fees differ too: 0.72% for NANC and 0.75% for PSCX.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

PSCX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.82 vs 1.96), 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.