PATN vs. EFAS

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

PATN (Pacer Nasdaq International Patent Leaders ETF) and EFAS (Global X MSCI SuperDividend® EAFE ETF) are both Foreign Large Cap Equities funds - PATN tracks the Nasdaq International Patent Leaders Index while EFAS tracks the MSCI EAFE Top 50 Dividend Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, PATN returned 65.39% vs 26.33% for EFAS. At a 0.45 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. PATN charges 0.65%/yr vs 0.56%/yr for EFAS.

Performance

PATN vs. EFAS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Pacer Nasdaq International Patent Leaders ETF (PATN) and Global X MSCI SuperDividend® EAFE ETF (EFAS). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, PATN achieves a 34.64% return, which is significantly higher than EFAS's 12.32% return.

PATN

• 1D: -5.19%
• 1M: 4.01%
• YTD: 34.64%
• 6M: 35.70%
• 1Y: 65.39%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

EFAS

• 1D: -0.28%
• 1M: -2.81%
• YTD: 12.32%
• 6M: 12.80%
• 1Y: 26.33%
• 3Y*: 24.76%
• 5Y*: 12.16%
• 10Y*: —

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

PATN vs. EFAS - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
PATN Pacer Nasdaq International Patent Leaders ETF	34.64%	40.01%	-1.73%
EFAS Global X MSCI SuperDividend® EAFE ETF	12.32%	46.83%	-7.75%

Correlation

The correlation between PATN and EFAS is 0.42, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.42
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 17, 2024	0.45

PATN vs. EFAS - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	PATN	EFAS
Technology	52.5%	0.1%
Industrials	14.8%	10.4%
Healthcare	9.4%	0.1%
Consumer Cyclical	7.0%	1.9%
Communication Services	6.1%	8.6%
Consumer Defensive	5.2%	8.1%
Basic Materials	2.4%	1.7%
Energy	2.1%	13.1%
Financial Services	0.5%	31.0%
Real Estate	-	11.4%
Utilities	-	13.7%

Return for Risk

PATN vs. EFAS — Risk / Return Rank

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

PATN

PATN Risk / Return Rank: 87
PATN Sharpe Ratio Rank: 89
PATN Sortino Ratio Rank: 82
PATN Omega Ratio Rank: 87
PATN Calmar Ratio Rank: 87
PATN Martin Ratio Rank: 88

EFAS

EFAS Risk / Return Rank: 79
EFAS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 80
EFAS Sortino Ratio Rank: 81
EFAS Omega Ratio Rank: 75
EFAS Calmar Ratio Rank: 88
EFAS Martin Ratio Rank: 72

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.

PATN vs. EFAS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Pacer Nasdaq International Patent Leaders ETF (PATN) and Global X MSCI SuperDividend® EAFE ETF (EFAS). 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.

	PATN	EFAS	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.75	2.42	+0.33
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.37	3.41	-0.04
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.49	1.42	+0.07
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.56	4.99	-0.43
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	17.76	12.82	+4.94

PATN vs. EFAS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current PATN Sharpe Ratio is 2.75, which is comparable to the EFAS Sharpe Ratio of 2.42. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of PATN and EFAS, 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

PATN vs. EFAS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PATN drawdown since its inception was -16.77%, smaller than the maximum EFAS drawdown of -44.38%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PATN and EFAS.

Drawdown Indicators

	PATN	EFAS	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-16.77%	-44.38%	+27.61%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-14.40%	-5.30%	-9.10%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-11.84%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-28.81%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-5.19%	-3.56%	-1.63%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.17%	-7.05%	+3.88%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.69%	2.06%	+1.63%

Volatility

PATN vs. EFAS - Volatility Comparison

Pacer Nasdaq International Patent Leaders ETF (PATN) has a higher volatility of 12.88% compared to Global X MSCI SuperDividend® EAFE ETF (EFAS) at 3.52%. This indicates that PATN's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than EFAS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	PATN	EFAS	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	12.88%	3.52%	+9.36%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	21.37%	8.69%	+12.68%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	23.92%	10.95%	+12.97%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	22.26%	15.59%	+6.67%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	22.26%	18.31%	+3.95%

PATN vs. EFAS - Expense Ratio Comparison

PATN has a 0.65% expense ratio, which is higher than EFAS's 0.56% expense ratio.

Dividends

PATN vs. EFAS - Dividend Comparison

PATN's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.61%, less than EFAS's 4.75% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016
EFAS Global X MSCI SuperDividend® EAFE ETF	4.75%	4.83%	6.76%	6.33%	7.28%	5.19%	4.34%	5.75%	6.63%	6.15%	0.21%
PATN Pacer Nasdaq International Patent Leaders ETF	1.61%	2.25%	0.30%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both PATN and EFAS in my portfolio?

PATN and EFAS have a correlation of 0.42, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, PATN or EFAS?

PATN has higher volatility (12.88%) compared to EFAS (3.52%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PATN dropped -16.77% vs EFAS's -44.38%.

Which ETF is better, PATN or EFAS?

On 1-year performance, PATN leads with 65.39% vs 26.33% for EFAS. On fees, EFAS is cheaper at 0.56% per year. On volatility, EFAS has been the lower-risk option at 3.52%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, PATN or EFAS?

Over the 1-year period, PATN has performed better with a 65.39% return vs 26.33%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, PATN or EFAS?

EFAS is cheaper with a 0.56% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for PATN.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, PATN or EFAS?

EFAS has the higher dividend yield at 4.75%, compared with 1.61% for PATN.

What is the main difference between PATN and EFAS?

PATN tracks Nasdaq International Patent Leaders Index, while EFAS tracks MSCI EAFE Top 50 Dividend Index. They also come from different issuers: Pacer and Global X. Their fees differ too: 0.65% for PATN and 0.56% for EFAS.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

PATN currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.75 vs 2.42), 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.