PAWZ vs. FAAR
PAWZ (ProShares Pet Care ETF) and FAAR (First Trust Alternative Absolute Return Strategy ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - PAWZ is a Global Equities fund tracking the FactSet Pet Care Index, while FAAR is a Commodities fund actively managed by First Trust. PAWZ is passively managed, while FAAR is actively managed. Over the past 5 years, PAWZ returned -9.18%/yr vs 7.15%/yr for FAAR. At a correlation of -0.03, they often move in opposite directions. PAWZ charges 0.50%/yr vs 0.95%/yr for FAAR.
Performance
PAWZ vs. FAAR - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, PAWZ achieves a -10.10% return, which is significantly lower than FAAR's 16.11% return.
PAWZ
- 1D
- 0.32%
- 1M
- 3.89%
- 6M
- -11.01%
- YTD
- -10.10%
- 1Y
- -15.01%
- 3Y*
- 0.04%
- 5Y*
- -9.18%
- 10Y*
- —
FAAR
- 1D
- -0.62%
- 1M
- -6.07%
- 6M
- 15.32%
- YTD
- 16.11%
- 1Y
- 24.69%
- 3Y*
- 9.29%
- 5Y*
- 7.15%
- 10Y*
- 4.30%
PAWZ vs. FAAR - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
PAWZ ProShares Pet Care ETF | -10.10% | 1.21% | 3.88% | 12.47% | -40.08% | 10.46% | 61.69% | 22.95% | -8.52% |
FAAR First Trust Alternative Absolute Return Strategy ETF | 16.11% | 8.07% | 5.97% | -5.63% | 10.15% | 12.34% | 8.60% | -1.28% | -1.64% |
Correlation
The correlation between PAWZ and FAAR is -0.18, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | -0.18 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | -0.06 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | -0.04 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 6, 2018 | -0.03 |
The correlation between PAWZ and FAAR shifts across timeframes, from -0.18 (1 year) to -0.03 (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
PAWZ vs. FAAR — Risk / Return Rank
PAWZ
FAAR
PAWZ vs. FAAR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ProShares Pet Care ETF (PAWZ) and First Trust Alternative Absolute Return Strategy ETF (FAAR). 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.
| PAWZ | FAAR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -2.78 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -3.97 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 0.86 | 1.33 | -0.46 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.71 | 2.86 | -3.57 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -1.54 | 10.39 | -11.93 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
PAWZ vs. FAAR - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum PAWZ drawdown since its inception was -50.07%, which is greater than FAAR's maximum drawdown of -18.03%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PAWZ and FAAR.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| PAWZ | FAAR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -50.07% | -18.03% | -32.04% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -21.10% | -8.67% | -12.43% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -23.12% | -11.54% | -11.58% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -50.07% | -18.03% | -32.04% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -18.03% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -40.19% | -8.67% | -31.52% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -22.77% | -7.82% | -14.95% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 9.75% | 2.38% | +7.37% |
Volatility
PAWZ vs. FAAR - Volatility Comparison
ProShares Pet Care ETF (PAWZ) has a higher volatility of 5.29% compared to First Trust Alternative Absolute Return Strategy ETF (FAAR) at 2.54%. This indicates that PAWZ's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FAAR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| PAWZ | FAAR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 5.29% | 2.54% | +2.75% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 12.31% | 9.75% | +2.56% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 17.01% | 13.09% | +3.92% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 20.28% | 12.94% | +7.34% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 21.64% | 11.55% | +10.09% |
PAWZ vs. FAAR - Expense Ratio Comparison
PAWZ has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is lower than FAAR's 0.95% expense ratio.
Dividends
PAWZ vs. FAAR - Dividend Comparison
PAWZ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.71%, less than FAAR's 9.86% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FAAR First Trust Alternative Absolute Return Strategy ETF | 9.86% | 11.63% | 3.45% | 3.20% | 5.82% | 6.49% | 3.05% | 1.02% | 0.58% | 2.83% |
PAWZ ProShares Pet Care ETF | 0.71% | 0.81% | 0.63% | 0.44% | 0.54% | 0.18% | 0.14% | 0.35% | 0.07% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
PAWZ and FAAR have a correlation of -0.18, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
PAWZ has higher volatility (5.29%) compared to FAAR (2.54%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PAWZ dropped -50.07% vs FAAR's -18.03%.
On 5-year performance, FAAR leads with 7.15% vs -9.18% for PAWZ. On fees, PAWZ is cheaper at 0.50% per year. On volatility, FAAR has been the lower-risk option at 2.54%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 5-year period, FAAR has performed better with a 7.15% return vs -9.18%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
PAWZ is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for FAAR.
FAAR has the higher dividend yield at 9.86%, compared with 0.71% for PAWZ.
PAWZ is categorized as Global Equities, while FAAR is Commodities. They also come from different issuers: ProShares and First Trust. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for PAWZ and 0.95% for FAAR.
FAAR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.89 vs -0.89), 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 PAWZ and FAAR
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