PAMC vs. XMHQ

Last updated Jun 23, 2026

PAMC (Pacer Lunt MidCap Multi-Factor Alternator ETF) and XMHQ (Invesco S&P MidCap Quality 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 XMHQ is a Mid Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the S&P MidCap 400 Quality Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, PAMC returned 9.70%/yr vs 9.84%/yr for XMHQ. Their correlation of 0.91 suggests significant overlap in exposure. PAMC charges 0.60%/yr vs 0.25%/yr for XMHQ.

Performance

PAMC vs. XMHQ - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Pacer Lunt MidCap Multi-Factor Alternator ETF (PAMC) and Invesco S&P MidCap Quality ETF (XMHQ). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, PAMC achieves a 19.58% return, which is significantly higher than XMHQ's 8.87% return.

PAMC

• 1D: 0.92%
• 1M: 4.55%
• YTD: 19.58%
• 6M: 16.63%
• 1Y: 32.16%
• 3Y*: 18.94%
• 5Y*: 9.70%
• 10Y*: —

XMHQ

• 1D: 0.55%
• 1M: 2.66%
• YTD: 8.87%
• 6M: 6.35%
• 1Y: 16.53%
• 3Y*: 15.38%
• 5Y*: 9.84%
• 10Y*: 13.03%

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

PAMC vs. XMHQ - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
PAMC Pacer Lunt MidCap Multi-Factor Alternator ETF	19.58%	1.54%	26.20%	19.30%	-12.15%	13.15%	34.86%
XMHQ Invesco S&P MidCap Quality ETF	8.87%	4.71%	16.79%	29.51%	-12.42%	20.98%	34.42%

Correlation

The correlation between PAMC and XMHQ is 0.85, 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	0.85
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.91
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.92
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 25, 2020	0.91

The correlation between PAMC and XMHQ has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.85 to 0.92 - a consistent structural relationship.

PAMC vs. XMHQ - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	PAMC	XMHQ
Industrials	25.8%	25.9%
Technology	16.1%	13.5%
Financial Services	15.8%	14.3%
Consumer Cyclical	11.8%	9.4%
Energy	9.8%	5.9%
Basic Materials	5.6%	5.0%
Real Estate	4.0%	-
Consumer Defensive	3.8%	3.4%
Healthcare	3.4%	20.4%
Utilities	3.1%	2.2%
Communication Services	0.7%	2.7%

Return for Risk

PAMC vs. XMHQ — Risk / Return Rank

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

PAMC

PAMC Risk / Return Rank: 57
PAMC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 52
PAMC Sortino Ratio Rank: 52
PAMC Omega Ratio Rank: 51
PAMC Calmar Ratio Rank: 66
PAMC Martin Ratio Rank: 66

XMHQ

XMHQ Risk / Return Rank: 33
XMHQ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 30
XMHQ Sortino Ratio Rank: 31
XMHQ Omega Ratio Rank: 27
XMHQ Calmar Ratio Rank: 39
XMHQ Martin Ratio Rank: 37

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. XMHQ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Pacer Lunt MidCap Multi-Factor Alternator ETF (PAMC) and Invesco S&P MidCap Quality ETF (XMHQ). 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	XMHQ	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.71	1.06	+0.66
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.45	1.63	+0.83
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.31	1.18	+0.13
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.15	1.88	+1.28
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	11.67	5.48	+6.19

PAMC vs. XMHQ - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current PAMC Sharpe Ratio is 1.71, which is higher than the XMHQ Sharpe Ratio of 1.06. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of PAMC and XMHQ, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

PAMC vs. XMHQ - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PAMC drawdown since its inception was -27.04%, smaller than the maximum XMHQ drawdown of -58.19%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PAMC and XMHQ.

Drawdown Indicators

	PAMC	XMHQ	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-27.04%	-58.19%	+31.15%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-10.24%	-8.85%	-1.39%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-26.07%	-24.56%	-1.51%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-26.61%	-25.47%	-1.14%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-36.90%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	-1.26%	+1.26%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-7.42%	-9.27%	+1.85%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.76%	3.02%	-0.26%

Volatility

PAMC vs. XMHQ - Volatility Comparison

Pacer Lunt MidCap Multi-Factor Alternator ETF (PAMC) has a higher volatility of 5.27% compared to Invesco S&P MidCap Quality ETF (XMHQ) at 4.35%. This indicates that PAMC's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than XMHQ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	PAMC	XMHQ	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.27%	4.35%	+0.92%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	14.35%	11.42%	+2.93%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	18.89%	15.76%	+3.13%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	20.39%	20.74%	-0.35%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	20.72%	20.71%	+0.01%

PAMC vs. XMHQ - Expense Ratio Comparison

PAMC has a 0.60% expense ratio, which is higher than XMHQ's 0.25% expense ratio.

Dividends

PAMC vs. XMHQ - Dividend Comparison

PAMC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.09%, more than XMHQ's 0.70% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
PAMC Pacer Lunt MidCap Multi-Factor Alternator ETF	1.09%	1.11%	0.97%	0.69%	1.29%	0.36%	0.30%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
XMHQ Invesco S&P MidCap Quality ETF	0.70%	0.64%	5.20%	0.73%	1.72%	1.00%	1.12%	1.22%	1.59%	1.06%	1.63%	1.34%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both PAMC and XMHQ in my portfolio?

PAMC and XMHQ have a correlation of 0.85, 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 XMHQ?

PAMC has higher volatility (5.27%) compared to XMHQ (4.35%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PAMC dropped -27.04% vs XMHQ's -58.19%.

Which ETF is better, PAMC or XMHQ?

On 5-year performance, XMHQ leads with 9.84% vs 9.70% for PAMC. On fees, XMHQ is cheaper at 0.25% per year. On volatility, XMHQ has been the lower-risk option at 4.35%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, PAMC or XMHQ?

Over the 5-year period, XMHQ has performed better with a 9.84% return vs 9.70%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, PAMC or XMHQ?

XMHQ is cheaper with a 0.25% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for PAMC.

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

PAMC has the higher dividend yield at 1.09%, compared with 0.70% for XMHQ.

What is the main difference between PAMC and XMHQ?

PAMC is categorized as Mid Cap Growth Equities, while XMHQ is Mid Cap Blend Equities. PAMC tracks Lunt Capital U.S. MidCap Multi-Factor Rotation Index, while XMHQ tracks S&P MidCap 400 Quality Index. They also come from different issuers: Pacer and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.60% for PAMC and 0.25% for XMHQ.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

PAMC currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.71 vs 1.06), 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.