PCSG vs. PAMC
PCSG (Polen 5Perspectives Small-Mid Growth ETF) and PAMC (Pacer Lunt MidCap Multi-Factor Alternator ETF) are both Mid Cap Growth Equities funds. PCSG is actively managed, while PAMC is passively managed. Their correlation of 0.81 suggests significant overlap in exposure. Both charge a 0.60% expense ratio.
Performance
PCSG vs. PAMC - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
PCSG
- 1D
- -0.62%
- 1M
- -10.84%
- 6M
- —
- YTD
- —
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- —
PAMC
- 1D
- -0.42%
- 1M
- -0.95%
- 6M
- 9.51%
- YTD
- 17.12%
- 1Y
- 22.67%
- 3Y*
- 15.83%
- 5Y*
- 10.22%
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- 15.50%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $123.86K | $132.76K | $351.95K | |
| $3.95K | $14.31K | $29.15K |
PCSG vs. PAMC - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | |
|---|---|
PCSG Polen 5Perspectives Small-Mid Growth ETF | -6.75% |
PAMC Pacer Lunt MidCap Multi-Factor Alternator ETF | 4.11% |
Correlation
The correlation between PCSG and PAMC is 0.81, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 18, 2026 | 0.81 |
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
PCSG vs. PAMC — Risk / Return Rank
PCSG
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
PAMC
PCSG vs. PAMC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Polen 5Perspectives Small-Mid Growth ETF (PCSG) and Pacer Lunt MidCap Multi-Factor Alternator ETF (PAMC). 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.
| PCSG | PAMC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | — | 1.23 | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | — | 2.22 | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | — | 8.01 | — |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
PCSG vs. PAMC - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum PCSG drawdown since its inception was -14.30%, smaller than the maximum PAMC drawdown of -27.04%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PCSG and PAMC.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| PCSG | PAMC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -14.30% | -27.04% | +12.74% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | — | -10.24% | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -26.07% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -26.61% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -13.11% | -2.05% | -11.06% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -5.04% | -7.34% | +2.30% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | — | 2.84% | — |
Volatility
PCSG vs. PAMC - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| PCSG | PAMC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | — | 3.92% | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | — | 13.99% | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 35.31% | 18.85% | +16.46% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 35.31% | 20.21% | +15.10% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 35.31% | 20.64% | +14.67% |
PCSG vs. PAMC - Expense Ratio Comparison
Both PCSG and PAMC have an expense ratio of 0.60%.
Dividends
PCSG vs. PAMC - Dividend Comparison
PCSG has not paid dividends to shareholders, while PAMC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.11%.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
PAMC Pacer Lunt MidCap Multi-Factor Alternator ETF | 1.11% | 1.11% | 0.97% | 0.69% | 1.29% | 0.36% | 0.30% |
PCSG Polen 5Perspectives Small-Mid Growth ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
PCSG and PAMC have a correlation of 0.81, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
Both ETFs have the same 0.60% expense ratio. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
PCSG and PAMC have the same expense ratio: 0.60% per year.
PAMC has the higher dividend yield at 1.11%, compared with 0.00% for PCSG.
They also come from different issuers: Polen and Pacer.
Find the right allocation for PCSG and PAMC
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