PAWZ vs. FYLD

Last updated Jun 17, 2026

PAWZ (ProShares Pet Care ETF) and FYLD (Cambria Foreign Shareholder Yield ETF) are both Global Equities funds. PAWZ is passively managed, while FYLD is actively managed. Over the past 5 years, PAWZ returned -9.14%/yr vs 11.99%/yr for FYLD. A 0.50 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. PAWZ charges 0.50%/yr vs 0.59%/yr for FYLD.

Performance

PAWZ vs. FYLD - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in ProShares Pet Care ETF (PAWZ) and Cambria Foreign Shareholder Yield ETF (FYLD). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, PAWZ achieves a -11.47% return, which is significantly lower than FYLD's 19.10% return.

PAWZ

• 1D: -0.01%
• 1M: 4.84%
• YTD: -11.47%
• 6M: -11.85%
• 1Y: -15.91%
• 3Y*: -1.31%
• 5Y*: -9.14%
• 10Y*: —

FYLD

• 1D: 0.03%
• 1M: -0.08%
• YTD: 19.10%
• 6M: 20.40%
• 1Y: 37.19%
• 3Y*: 21.46%
• 5Y*: 11.99%
• 10Y*: 11.83%

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

PAWZ vs. FYLD - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018
PAWZ ProShares Pet Care ETF	-11.47%	1.21%	3.88%	12.47%	-40.08%	10.46%	61.69%	22.95%	-8.52%
FYLD Cambria Foreign Shareholder Yield ETF	19.10%	34.53%	3.00%	13.18%	-5.53%	18.67%	4.17%	17.83%	-7.39%

Correlation

The correlation between PAWZ and FYLD is 0.38, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.38
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.45
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.52
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 6, 2018	0.50

The correlation between PAWZ and FYLD shifts across timeframes, from 0.38 (1 year) to 0.52 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

PAWZ vs. FYLD - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	PAWZ	FYLD
Healthcare	32.6%	-
Consumer Defensive	16.3%	5.4%
Consumer Cyclical	12.5%	8.1%
Basic Materials	5.0%	9.0%
Technology	4.2%	3.6%
Financial Services	4.1%	19.0%
Communication Services	-	3.7%
Energy	-	31.2%
Industrials	-	16.1%
Real Estate	-	-
Utilities	-	1.6%

Return for Risk

PAWZ vs. FYLD — Risk / Return Rank

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

PAWZ

PAWZ Risk / Return Rank: 2
PAWZ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2
PAWZ Sortino Ratio Rank: 2
PAWZ Omega Ratio Rank: 2
PAWZ Calmar Ratio Rank: 3
PAWZ Martin Ratio Rank: 0

FYLD

FYLD Risk / Return Rank: 93
FYLD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 93
FYLD Sortino Ratio Rank: 93
FYLD Omega Ratio Rank: 91
FYLD Calmar Ratio Rank: 94
FYLD Martin Ratio Rank: 94

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.

PAWZ vs. FYLD - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ProShares Pet Care ETF (PAWZ) and Cambria Foreign Shareholder Yield ETF (FYLD). 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	FYLD	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.97	3.15	-4.12
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-1.34	4.35	-5.68
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.85	1.56	-0.71
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.75	6.87	-7.63
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-1.77	24.24	-26.01

PAWZ vs. FYLD - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current PAWZ Sharpe Ratio is -0.97, which is lower than the FYLD Sharpe Ratio of 3.15. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of PAWZ and FYLD, 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

PAWZ vs. FYLD - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PAWZ drawdown since its inception was -50.07%, which is greater than FYLD's maximum drawdown of -44.55%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PAWZ and FYLD.

Drawdown Indicators

	PAWZ	FYLD	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-50.07%	-44.55%	-5.52%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-21.26%	-5.44%	-15.82%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-23.12%	-15.15%	-7.97%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-50.07%	-25.12%	-24.95%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-44.55%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-41.10%	-1.05%	-40.05%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-22.64%	-8.81%	-13.83%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	8.99%	1.54%	+7.45%

Volatility

PAWZ vs. FYLD - Volatility Comparison

ProShares Pet Care ETF (PAWZ) and Cambria Foreign Shareholder Yield ETF (FYLD) have volatilities of 3.76% and 3.76%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	PAWZ	FYLD	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.76%	3.76%	0.00%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	11.44%	9.22%	+2.22%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	16.53%	11.85%	+4.68%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	20.19%	16.27%	+3.92%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	21.64%	18.01%	+3.63%

PAWZ vs. FYLD - Expense Ratio Comparison

PAWZ has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is lower than FYLD's 0.59% expense ratio.

Dividends

PAWZ vs. FYLD - Dividend Comparison

PAWZ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.86%, less than FYLD's 3.63% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
FYLD Cambria Foreign Shareholder Yield ETF	3.63%	4.07%	5.41%	6.06%	6.13%	4.74%	3.94%	3.73%	5.17%	2.85%	2.72%	3.98%
PAWZ ProShares Pet Care ETF	0.86%	0.81%	0.63%	0.44%	0.54%	0.18%	0.14%	0.35%	0.07%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both PAWZ and FYLD in my portfolio?

PAWZ and FYLD have a correlation of 0.38, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, PAWZ or FYLD?

FYLD has higher volatility (3.76%) compared to PAWZ (3.76%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PAWZ dropped -50.07% vs FYLD's -44.55%.

Which ETF is better, PAWZ or FYLD?

On 5-year performance, FYLD leads with 11.99% vs -9.14% for PAWZ. On fees, PAWZ is cheaper at 0.50% per year. Their volatility is very similar. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, PAWZ or FYLD?

Over the 5-year period, FYLD has performed better with a 11.99% return vs -9.14%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, PAWZ or FYLD?

PAWZ is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.59% for FYLD.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, PAWZ or FYLD?

FYLD has the higher dividend yield at 3.63%, compared with 0.86% for PAWZ.

What is the main difference between PAWZ and FYLD?

They also come from different issuers: ProShares and Cambria. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for PAWZ and 0.59% for FYLD.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FYLD currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.15 vs -0.97), 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.