PAMC vs. COMB
PAMC (Pacer Lunt MidCap Multi-Factor Alternator ETF) and COMB (GraniteShares Bloomberg Commodity Broad Strategy No K-1 ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - PAMC is a Mid Cap Growth Equities fund tracking the Lunt Capital U.S. MidCap Multi-Factor Rotation Index, while COMB is a Commodities fund actively managed by GraniteShares. PAMC is passively managed, while COMB is actively managed. Over the past 5 years, PAMC returned 9.36%/yr vs 9.83%/yr for COMB. At a 0.22 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. PAMC charges 0.60%/yr vs 0.25%/yr for COMB.
Performance
PAMC vs. COMB - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, PAMC achieves a 16.47% return, which is significantly lower than COMB's 17.53% return.
PAMC
- 1D
- -0.00%
- 1M
- -2.05%
- 6M
- 9.67%
- YTD
- 16.47%
- 1Y
- 23.05%
- 3Y*
- 15.85%
- 5Y*
- 9.36%
- 10Y*
- —
COMB
- 1D
- 0.00%
- 1M
- -1.59%
- 6M
- 14.82%
- YTD
- 17.53%
- 1Y
- 25.91%
- 3Y*
- 11.95%
- 5Y*
- 9.83%
- 10Y*
- —
PAMC vs. COMB - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
PAMC Pacer Lunt MidCap Multi-Factor Alternator ETF | 16.47% | 1.54% | 26.20% | 19.30% | -12.15% | 13.15% | 34.86% |
COMB GraniteShares Bloomberg Commodity Broad Strategy No K-1 ETF | 17.53% | 15.12% | 5.24% | -7.75% | 14.56% | 26.34% | 23.20% |
Correlation
The correlation between PAMC and COMB is -0.07, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | -0.07 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.10 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.20 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 25, 2020 | 0.22 |
The correlation between PAMC and COMB shifts across timeframes, from -0.07 (1 year) to 0.22 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
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
PAMC vs. COMB — Risk / Return Rank
PAMC
COMB
PAMC vs. COMB - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Pacer Lunt MidCap Multi-Factor Alternator ETF (PAMC) and GraniteShares Bloomberg Commodity Broad Strategy No K-1 ETF (COMB). 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.
| PAMC | COMB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.38 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.31 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.22 | 1.28 | -0.06 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.18 | 1.82 | +0.36 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 7.98 | 6.14 | +1.84 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
PAMC vs. COMB - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum PAMC drawdown since its inception was -27.04%, smaller than the maximum COMB drawdown of -33.50%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PAMC and COMB.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| PAMC | COMB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -27.04% | -33.50% | +6.46% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -10.24% | -14.84% | +4.60% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -26.07% | -14.84% | -11.23% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -26.61% | -26.63% | +0.02% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -2.60% | -11.35% | +8.75% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -7.37% | -12.05% | +4.68% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.80% | 4.40% | -1.60% |
Volatility
PAMC vs. COMB - Volatility Comparison
Pacer Lunt MidCap Multi-Factor Alternator ETF (PAMC) has a higher volatility of 5.01% compared to GraniteShares Bloomberg Commodity Broad Strategy No K-1 ETF (COMB) at 4.24%. This indicates that PAMC's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than COMB based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| PAMC | COMB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 5.01% | 4.24% | +0.77% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 14.14% | 15.09% | -0.95% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 18.99% | 17.38% | +1.61% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 20.35% | 16.69% | +3.66% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 20.68% | 15.15% | +5.53% |
PAMC vs. COMB - Expense Ratio Comparison
PAMC has a 0.60% expense ratio, which is higher than COMB's 0.25% expense ratio.
Dividends
PAMC vs. COMB - Dividend Comparison
PAMC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.12%, less than COMB's 7.70% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
COMB GraniteShares Bloomberg Commodity Broad Strategy No K-1 ETF | 7.70% | 9.05% | 2.48% | 6.57% | 30.85% | 15.83% | 0.07% | 1.48% | 0.97% | 0.20% |
PAMC Pacer Lunt MidCap Multi-Factor Alternator ETF | 1.12% | 1.11% | 0.97% | 0.69% | 1.29% | 0.36% | 0.30% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
PAMC and COMB have a correlation of -0.07, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
PAMC has higher volatility (5.01%) compared to COMB (4.24%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PAMC dropped -27.04% vs COMB's -33.50%.
On 5-year performance, COMB leads with 9.83% vs 9.36% for PAMC. On fees, COMB is cheaper at 0.25% per year. On volatility, COMB has been the lower-risk option at 4.24%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 5-year period, COMB has performed better with a 9.83% return vs 9.36%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
COMB is cheaper with a 0.25% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for PAMC.
COMB has the higher dividend yield at 7.70%, compared with 1.12% for PAMC.
PAMC is categorized as Mid Cap Growth Equities, while COMB is Commodities. They also come from different issuers: Pacer and GraniteShares. Their fees differ too: 0.60% for PAMC and 0.25% for COMB.
COMB currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.56 vs 1.18), 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 PAMC and COMB
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