PALC vs. QVML
PALC (Pacer Lunt Large Cap Multi-Factor Alternator ETF) and QVML (Invesco S&P 500 QVM Multi-factor ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - PALC is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund tracking the Lunt Capital U.S. Large Cap Multi-Factor Rotation Index, while QVML is a Multi-factor fund tracking the S&P 500 Quality, Value &Momentum Top 90% Multi-Factor Index - Benchmark TR Gross. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, PALC returned 16.40%/yr vs 21.14%/yr for QVML. Their correlation of 0.87 suggests significant overlap in exposure. PALC charges 0.60%/yr vs 0.11%/yr for QVML.
Performance
PALC vs. QVML - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, PALC achieves a 10.24% return, which is significantly higher than QVML's 8.76% return.
PALC
- 1D
- -2.85%
- 1M
- 2.12%
- YTD
- 10.24%
- 6M
- 9.48%
- 1Y
- 19.99%
- 3Y*
- 16.40%
- 5Y*
- 9.43%
- 10Y*
- —
QVML
- 1D
- -1.35%
- 1M
- -1.10%
- YTD
- 8.76%
- 6M
- 7.73%
- 1Y
- 24.15%
- 3Y*
- 21.14%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
PALC vs. QVML - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
PALC Pacer Lunt Large Cap Multi-Factor Alternator ETF | 10.24% | 7.28% | 21.24% | 17.52% | -14.74% | 8.87% |
QVML Invesco S&P 500 QVM Multi-factor ETF | 8.76% | 17.74% | 25.87% | 22.19% | -16.25% | 12.72% |
Correlation
The correlation between PALC and QVML is 0.76, 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 | 0.76 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.84 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 30, 2021 | 0.87 |
The correlation between PALC and QVML shifts across timeframes, from 0.76 (1 year) to 0.87 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
PALC vs. QVML - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
PALC
QVML
Healthcare
Technology
Industrials
Consumer Defensive
Financial Services
Consumer Cyclical
Energy
Basic Materials
Utilities
Communication Services
Real Estate
Healthcare
PALC
QVML
Technology
PALC
QVML
Industrials
PALC
QVML
Consumer Defensive
PALC
QVML
Financial Services
PALC
QVML
Consumer Cyclical
PALC
QVML
Energy
PALC
QVML
Basic Materials
PALC
QVML
Utilities
PALC
QVML
Communication Services
PALC
QVML
Real Estate
PALC
QVML
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. QVML — Risk / Return Rank
PALC
QVML
PALC vs. QVML - 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 Invesco S&P 500 QVM Multi-factor ETF (QVML). 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.
| PALC | QVML | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.48 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.66 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.27 | 1.36 | -0.08 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.25 | 2.78 | -0.53 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 8.15 | 12.59 | -4.44 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
PALC vs. QVML - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum PALC drawdown since its inception was -24.45%, roughly equal to the maximum QVML drawdown of -23.52%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PALC and QVML.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| PALC | QVML | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -24.45% | -23.52% | -0.93% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -8.94% | -8.73% | -0.21% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -17.39% | -18.71% | +1.32% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -24.45% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -2.85% | -2.73% | -0.12% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -6.29% | -5.36% | -0.93% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.46% | 1.92% | +0.54% |
Volatility
PALC vs. QVML - Volatility Comparison
Pacer Lunt Large Cap Multi-Factor Alternator ETF (PALC) has a higher volatility of 7.41% compared to Invesco S&P 500 QVM Multi-factor ETF (QVML) at 4.54%. This indicates that PALC's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than QVML based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| PALC | QVML | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 7.41% | 4.54% | +2.87% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 10.87% | 9.80% | +1.07% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 13.38% | 12.19% | +1.19% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 16.47% | 16.61% | -0.14% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 17.23% | 16.61% | +0.62% |
PALC vs. QVML - Expense Ratio Comparison
PALC has a 0.60% expense ratio, which is higher than QVML's 0.11% expense ratio.
Dividends
PALC vs. QVML - Dividend Comparison
PALC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.06%, more than QVML's 1.03% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
PALC Pacer Lunt Large Cap Multi-Factor Alternator ETF | 1.06% | 1.08% | 0.93% | 0.74% | 1.69% | 0.64% | 0.72% |
QVML Invesco S&P 500 QVM Multi-factor ETF | 1.03% | 1.10% | 1.15% | 1.43% | 1.72% | 0.62% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
PALC and QVML have a correlation of 0.76, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
PALC has higher volatility (7.41%) compared to QVML (4.54%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PALC dropped -24.45% vs QVML's -23.52%.
On 3-year performance, QVML leads with 21.14% vs 16.40% for PALC. On fees, QVML is cheaper at 0.11% per year. On volatility, QVML has been the lower-risk option at 4.54%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 3-year period, QVML has performed better with a 21.14% return vs 16.40%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
QVML is cheaper with a 0.11% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for PALC.
PALC has the higher dividend yield at 1.06%, compared with 1.03% for QVML.
PALC is categorized as Large Cap Growth Equities, while QVML is Multi-factor. PALC tracks Lunt Capital U.S. Large Cap Multi-Factor Rotation Index, while QVML tracks S&P 500 Quality, Value &Momentum Top 90% Multi-Factor Index - Benchmark TR Gross. They also come from different issuers: Pacer and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.60% for PALC and 0.11% for QVML.
QVML currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.99 vs 1.51), 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.
Find the right allocation for PALC and QVML
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