PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
PALC vs. QUS
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

PALC vs. QUS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Pacer Lunt Large Cap Multi-Factor Alternator ETF (PALC) and SPDR MSCI USA StrategicFactors ETF (QUS). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, PALC achieves a 11.39% return, which is significantly higher than QUS's 6.67% return.


PALC

1D
-0.38%
1M
6.95%
YTD
11.39%
6M
12.77%
1Y
21.51%
3Y*
17.82%
5Y*
9.40%
10Y*

QUS

1D
-0.43%
1M
2.68%
YTD
6.67%
6M
6.93%
1Y
17.65%
3Y*
17.53%
5Y*
11.08%
10Y*
13.67%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

PALC vs. QUS - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020
PALC
Pacer Lunt Large Cap Multi-Factor Alternator ETF
11.39%7.28%21.24%17.52%-14.74%41.03%22.18%
QUS
SPDR MSCI USA StrategicFactors ETF
6.67%14.13%18.99%21.78%-14.15%26.72%20.05%

Correlation

The correlation between PALC and QUS is 0.84, 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

0.84

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.86

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.88

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 26, 2020

0.85

The correlation between PALC and QUS has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.84 to 0.88 - a consistent structural relationship.

PALC vs. QUS - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
PALC
QUS

Financial Services

22.6%
14.6%

Technology

15.2%
26.3%

Industrials

14.1%
8.6%

Healthcare

11.9%
13.4%

Energy

10.6%
4.6%

Consumer Defensive

10.6%
9.2%

Communication Services

6.2%
10.2%

Consumer Cyclical

4.9%
5.8%

Basic Materials

2.2%
2.3%

Utilities

1.5%
3.6%

Real Estate

0.3%
1.4%

Financial Services

PALC
22.6%
QUS
14.6%

Technology

PALC
15.2%
QUS
26.3%

Industrials

PALC
14.1%
QUS
8.6%

Healthcare

PALC
11.9%
QUS
13.4%

Energy

PALC
10.6%
QUS
4.6%

Consumer Defensive

PALC
10.6%
QUS
9.2%

Communication Services

PALC
6.2%
QUS
10.2%

Consumer Cyclical

PALC
4.9%
QUS
5.8%

Basic Materials

PALC
2.2%
QUS
2.3%

Utilities

PALC
1.5%
QUS
3.6%

Real Estate

PALC
0.3%
QUS
1.4%

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

PALC vs. QUS — Risk / Return Rank

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

PALC
PALC Risk / Return Rank: 5252
Overall Rank
PALC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5454
Sharpe Ratio Rank
PALC Sortino Ratio Rank: 5555
Sortino Ratio Rank
PALC Omega Ratio Rank: 5151
Omega Ratio Rank
PALC Calmar Ratio Rank: 4949
Calmar Ratio Rank
PALC Martin Ratio Rank: 5353
Martin Ratio Rank

QUS
QUS Risk / Return Rank: 5757
Overall Rank
QUS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5656
Sharpe Ratio Rank
QUS Sortino Ratio Rank: 5858
Sortino Ratio Rank
QUS Omega Ratio Rank: 5555
Omega Ratio Rank
QUS Calmar Ratio Rank: 5252
Calmar Ratio Rank
QUS Martin Ratio Rank: 6363
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.

PALC vs. QUS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Pacer Lunt Large Cap Multi-Factor Alternator ETF (PALC) and SPDR MSCI USA StrategicFactors ETF (QUS). 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.


PALCQUSDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.09

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.15

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.32

1.35

-0.03

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.42

2.59

-0.17

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

8.98

11.54

-2.56

PALC vs. QUS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current PALC Sharpe Ratio is 1.87, which is comparable to the QUS Sharpe Ratio of 1.95. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of PALC and QUS, 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


PALCQUSDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.87

1.95

-0.09

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.58

0.78

-0.20

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.83

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.98

0.77

+0.21

Drawdowns

PALC vs. QUS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PALC drawdown since its inception was -24.45%, smaller than the maximum QUS drawdown of -33.78%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PALC and QUS.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


PALCQUSDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-24.45%

-33.78%

+9.33%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-8.94%

-6.85%

-2.09%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-17.39%

-13.94%

-3.45%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-24.45%

-22.30%

-2.15%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-33.78%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.38%

-0.50%

+0.12%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-6.33%

-3.70%

-2.63%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.40%

1.53%

+0.87%

Volatility

PALC vs. QUS - Volatility Comparison

Pacer Lunt Large Cap Multi-Factor Alternator ETF (PALC) has a higher volatility of 2.95% compared to SPDR MSCI USA StrategicFactors ETF (QUS) at 1.78%. This indicates that PALC's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than QUS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


PALCQUSDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

2.95%

1.78%

+1.17%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

8.55%

6.66%

+1.89%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

11.58%

9.09%

+2.49%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

16.22%

14.33%

+1.89%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

17.07%

16.42%

+0.65%

PALC vs. QUS - Expense Ratio Comparison

PALC has a 0.60% expense ratio, which is higher than QUS's 0.15% expense ratio.


Dividends

PALC vs. QUS - Dividend Comparison

PALC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.04%, less than QUS's 1.31% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
PALC
Pacer Lunt Large Cap Multi-Factor Alternator ETF
1.04%1.08%0.93%0.74%1.69%0.64%0.72%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
QUS
SPDR MSCI USA StrategicFactors ETF
1.31%1.38%1.49%1.57%1.68%1.27%1.73%1.81%2.12%1.86%2.07%1.48%

Frequently Asked Questions


PALC and QUS have a correlation of 0.84, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

PALC has higher volatility (2.95%) compared to QUS (1.78%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PALC dropped -24.45% vs QUS's -33.78%.

On 5-year performance, QUS leads with 11.08% vs 9.40% for PALC. On fees, QUS is cheaper at 0.15% per year. On volatility, QUS has been the lower-risk option at 1.78%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 5-year period, QUS has performed better with a 11.08% return vs 9.40%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

QUS is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for PALC.

QUS has the higher dividend yield at 1.31%, compared with 1.04% for PALC.

PALC tracks Lunt Capital U.S. Large Cap Multi-Factor Rotation Index, while QUS tracks MSCI USA Factor Mix A-Series Capped (USD). They also come from different issuers: Pacer and State Street. Their fees differ too: 0.60% for PALC and 0.15% for QUS.

QUS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.95 vs 1.87), 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 PALC and QUS

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