PSCQ vs. IVVM

Last updated Jun 6, 2026

PSCQ (Pacer Swan SOS Conservative (October) ETF) and IVVM (iShares Large Cap Moderate Buffer ETF) are both Options Trading funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, PSCQ returned 14.83% vs 15.30% for IVVM. Their correlation of 0.83 suggests significant overlap in exposure. PSCQ charges 0.60%/yr vs 0.50%/yr for IVVM.

Performance

PSCQ vs. IVVM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Pacer Swan SOS Conservative (October) ETF (PSCQ) and iShares Large Cap Moderate Buffer ETF (IVVM). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, PSCQ achieves a 4.64% return, which is significantly lower than IVVM's 5.14% return.

PSCQ

• 1D: -0.86%
• 1M: 0.54%
• YTD: 4.64%
• 6M: 5.04%
• 1Y: 14.83%
• 3Y*: 12.25%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

IVVM

• 1D: -0.98%
• 1M: 0.39%
• YTD: 5.14%
• 6M: 5.25%
• 1Y: 15.30%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

PSCQ vs. IVVM - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
PSCQ Pacer Swan SOS Conservative (October) ETF	4.64%	11.50%	9.72%	8.81%
IVVM iShares Large Cap Moderate Buffer ETF	5.14%	14.24%	16.08%	5.17%

Correlation

The correlation between PSCQ and IVVM is 0.90, 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	0.90
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 3, 2023	0.83

The correlation between PSCQ and IVVM has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.83 to 0.90 - a consistent structural relationship.

PSCQ vs. IVVM - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	PSCQ	IVVM
Technology	36.2%	36.2%
Financial Services	11.9%	11.9%
Communication Services	10.9%	10.9%
Consumer Cyclical	10.1%	10.1%
Healthcare	8.4%	8.4%
Industrials	8.1%	8.1%
Consumer Defensive	4.9%	4.9%
Energy	3.5%	3.5%
Utilities	2.3%	2.3%
Real Estate	1.9%	1.9%
Basic Materials	1.8%	1.8%

Return for Risk

PSCQ vs. IVVM — Risk / Return Rank

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

PSCQ

PSCQ Risk / Return Rank: 82
PSCQ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 82
PSCQ Sortino Ratio Rank: 87
PSCQ Omega Ratio Rank: 87
PSCQ Calmar Ratio Rank: 69
PSCQ Martin Ratio Rank: 85

IVVM

IVVM Risk / Return Rank: 71
IVVM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 69
IVVM Sortino Ratio Rank: 71
IVVM Omega Ratio Rank: 78
IVVM Calmar Ratio Rank: 60
IVVM Martin Ratio Rank: 78

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.

PSCQ vs. IVVM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Pacer Swan SOS Conservative (October) ETF (PSCQ) and iShares Large Cap Moderate Buffer ETF (IVVM). 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.

	PSCQ	IVVM	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.51	2.16	+0.35
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.69	3.08	+0.61
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.51	1.44	+0.06
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.25	2.90	+0.36
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	16.35	14.40	+1.95
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

PSCQ vs. IVVM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current PSCQ Sharpe Ratio is 2.51, which is comparable to the IVVM Sharpe Ratio of 2.16. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of PSCQ and IVVM, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	PSCQ	IVVM	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.51	2.16	+0.35
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.20	1.46	-0.25

Drawdowns

PSCQ vs. IVVM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PSCQ drawdown since its inception was -9.92%, smaller than the maximum IVVM drawdown of -11.62%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PSCQ and IVVM.

Drawdown Indicators

	PSCQ	IVVM	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-9.92%	-11.62%	+1.70%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-4.58%	-5.31%	+0.73%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-9.92%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.87%	-0.98%	+0.11%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.58%	-0.92%	-0.66%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.91%	1.06%	-0.15%

Volatility

PSCQ vs. IVVM - Volatility Comparison

Pacer Swan SOS Conservative (October) ETF (PSCQ) and iShares Large Cap Moderate Buffer ETF (IVVM) have volatilities of 1.17% and 1.22%, 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

	PSCQ	IVVM	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.17%	1.22%	-0.05%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	4.54%	5.71%	-1.17%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	5.94%	7.11%	-1.17%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	7.57%	9.63%	-2.06%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	7.57%	9.63%	-2.06%

PSCQ vs. IVVM - Expense Ratio Comparison

PSCQ has a 0.60% expense ratio, which is higher than IVVM's 0.50% expense ratio.

Dividends

PSCQ vs. IVVM - Dividend Comparison

PSCQ has not paid dividends to shareholders, while IVVM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.65%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024
IVVM iShares Large Cap Moderate Buffer ETF	0.65%	0.68%	0.62%
PSCQ Pacer Swan SOS Conservative (October) ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both PSCQ and IVVM in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.90, PSCQ and IVVM move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

Which is riskier, PSCQ or IVVM?

IVVM has higher volatility (1.22%) compared to PSCQ (1.17%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PSCQ dropped -9.92% vs IVVM's -11.62%.

Which ETF is better, PSCQ or IVVM?

On 1-year performance, IVVM leads with 15.30% vs 14.83% for PSCQ. On fees, IVVM 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, PSCQ or IVVM?

Over the 1-year period, IVVM has performed better with a 15.30% return vs 14.83%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, PSCQ or IVVM?

IVVM is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for PSCQ.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, PSCQ or IVVM?

IVVM has the higher dividend yield at 0.65%, compared with 0.00% for PSCQ.

What is the main difference between PSCQ and IVVM?

They also come from different issuers: Pacer and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.60% for PSCQ and 0.50% for IVVM.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

PSCQ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.51 vs 2.16), 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.