PAMC vs. RECS

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

PAMC (Pacer Lunt MidCap Multi-Factor Alternator ETF) and RECS (Columbia Research Enhanced Core 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 RECS is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund tracking the Beta Advantage Research Enhanced U.S. Equity Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, PAMC returned 8.58%/yr vs 14.04%/yr for RECS. A 0.80 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. PAMC charges 0.60%/yr vs 0.15%/yr for RECS.

Performance

PAMC vs. RECS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Pacer Lunt MidCap Multi-Factor Alternator ETF (PAMC) and Columbia Research Enhanced Core ETF (RECS). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, PAMC achieves a 17.95% return, which is significantly higher than RECS's 6.61% return.

PAMC

• 1D: 0.20%
• 1M: 5.18%
• YTD: 17.95%
• 6M: 18.02%
• 1Y: 28.44%
• 3Y*: 18.46%
• 5Y*: 8.58%
• 10Y*: —

RECS

• 1D: -0.75%
• 1M: 4.11%
• YTD: 6.61%
• 6M: 6.84%
• 1Y: 25.02%
• 3Y*: 21.66%
• 5Y*: 14.04%
• 10Y*: 9.89%

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

PAMC vs. RECS - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
PAMC Pacer Lunt MidCap Multi-Factor Alternator ETF	17.95%	1.54%	26.20%	19.30%	-12.15%	13.15%	34.03%
RECS Columbia Research Enhanced Core ETF	6.61%	19.30%	26.27%	23.19%	-14.39%	32.73%	21.06%

Correlation

The correlation between PAMC and RECS is 0.69, 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	0.69
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.75
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.80
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 26, 2020	0.80

The correlation between PAMC and RECS shifts across timeframes, from 0.69 (1 year) to 0.80 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

PAMC vs. RECS - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	PAMC	RECS
Industrials	25.6%	6.7%
Financial Services	16.5%	13.2%
Technology	14.1%	33.6%
Consumer Cyclical	12.1%	10.6%
Energy	10.8%	3.4%
Basic Materials	5.4%	2.1%
Consumer Defensive	4.2%	5.0%
Real Estate	4.1%	2.3%
Healthcare	3.4%	9.9%
Utilities	3.1%	2.2%
Communication Services	0.8%	11.0%

Return for Risk

PAMC vs. RECS — Risk / Return Rank

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

PAMC

PAMC Risk / Return Rank: 50
PAMC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 44
PAMC Sortino Ratio Rank: 45
PAMC Omega Ratio Rank: 44
PAMC Calmar Ratio Rank: 56
PAMC Martin Ratio Rank: 58

RECS

RECS Risk / Return Rank: 62
RECS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 63
RECS Sortino Ratio Rank: 63
RECS Omega Ratio Rank: 62
RECS Calmar Ratio Rank: 57
RECS Martin Ratio Rank: 66

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.

PAMC vs. RECS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Pacer Lunt MidCap Multi-Factor Alternator ETF (PAMC) and Columbia Research Enhanced Core ETF (RECS). 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.

	PAMC	RECS	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.55	2.13	-0.58
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.26	2.97	-0.71
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.29	1.38	-0.09
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.79	2.85	-0.06
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	10.32	12.27	-1.95
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

PAMC vs. RECS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current PAMC Sharpe Ratio is 1.55, which is comparable to the RECS Sharpe Ratio of 2.13. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of PAMC and RECS, 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

	PAMC	RECS	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.55	2.13	-0.58
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.42	0.86	-0.44
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	0.61	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.77	0.38	+0.39

Drawdowns

PAMC vs. RECS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PAMC drawdown since its inception was -27.04%, smaller than the maximum RECS drawdown of -34.29%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PAMC and RECS.

Drawdown Indicators

	PAMC	RECS	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-27.04%	-34.29%	+7.25%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-10.24%	-8.82%	-1.42%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-26.07%	-18.60%	-7.47%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-27.04%	-22.08%	-4.96%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-34.29%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	-0.93%	+0.93%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-7.47%	-1.28%	-6.19%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.76%	2.04%	+0.72%

Volatility

PAMC vs. RECS - Volatility Comparison

Pacer Lunt MidCap Multi-Factor Alternator ETF (PAMC) has a higher volatility of 5.65% compared to Columbia Research Enhanced Core ETF (RECS) at 2.97%. This indicates that PAMC's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than RECS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	PAMC	RECS	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.65%	2.97%	+2.68%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	14.17%	8.84%	+5.33%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	18.44%	11.78%	+6.66%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	20.40%	16.38%	+4.02%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	20.73%	16.22%	+4.51%

PAMC vs. RECS - Expense Ratio Comparison

PAMC has a 0.60% expense ratio, which is higher than RECS's 0.15% expense ratio.

Dividends

PAMC vs. RECS - Dividend Comparison

PAMC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.10%, more than RECS's 1.04% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019
PAMC Pacer Lunt MidCap Multi-Factor Alternator ETF	1.10%	1.11%	0.97%	0.69%	1.29%	0.36%	0.30%	0.00%
RECS Columbia Research Enhanced Core ETF	1.04%	1.11%	1.09%	1.00%	1.41%	20.64%	1.09%	0.49%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both PAMC and RECS in my portfolio?

PAMC and RECS have a correlation of 0.69, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, PAMC or RECS?

PAMC has higher volatility (5.65%) compared to RECS (2.97%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PAMC dropped -27.04% vs RECS's -34.29%.

Which ETF is better, PAMC or RECS?

On 5-year performance, RECS leads with 14.04% vs 8.58% for PAMC. On fees, RECS is cheaper at 0.15% per year. On volatility, RECS has been the lower-risk option at 2.97%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, PAMC or RECS?

Over the 5-year period, RECS has performed better with a 14.04% return vs 8.58%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, PAMC or RECS?

RECS is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for PAMC.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, PAMC or RECS?

PAMC has the higher dividend yield at 1.10%, compared with 1.04% for RECS.

What is the main difference between PAMC and RECS?

PAMC is categorized as Mid Cap Growth Equities, while RECS is Large Cap Growth Equities. PAMC tracks Lunt Capital U.S. MidCap Multi-Factor Rotation Index, while RECS tracks Beta Advantage Research Enhanced U.S. Equity Index. They also come from different issuers: Pacer and Ameriprise Financial. Their fees differ too: 0.60% for PAMC and 0.15% for RECS.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

RECS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.13 vs 1.55), 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.