PSCW vs. QMAR

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

PSCW (Pacer Swan SOS Conservative (April) ETF) and QMAR (FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March) are both exchange-traded funds - PSCW is a Defined Outcome fund actively managed by Pacer, while QMAR is a Nasdaq-100 fund actively managed by First Trust. Both are actively managed. Over the past 5 years, PSCW returned 7.19%/yr vs 12.13%/yr for QMAR. Their correlation of 0.84 suggests significant overlap in exposure. PSCW charges 0.61%/yr vs 0.90%/yr for QMAR.

Performance

PSCW vs. QMAR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Pacer Swan SOS Conservative (April) ETF (PSCW) and FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March (QMAR). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, PSCW achieves a 7.49% return, which is significantly lower than QMAR's 13.06% return.

PSCW

• 1D: -0.07%
• 1M: 1.58%
• YTD: 7.49%
• 6M: 8.21%
• 1Y: 14.98%
• 3Y*: 11.73%
• 5Y*: 7.19%
• 10Y*: —

QMAR

• 1D: -0.09%
• 1M: 2.81%
• YTD: 13.06%
• 6M: 14.01%
• 1Y: 23.38%
• 3Y*: 16.73%
• 5Y*: 12.13%
• 10Y*: —

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

PSCW vs. QMAR - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
PSCW Pacer Swan SOS Conservative (April) ETF	7.49%	6.56%	12.95%	11.44%	-5.52%	6.27%
QMAR FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March	13.06%	10.89%	16.11%	35.47%	-16.56%	10.83%

Correlation

The correlation between PSCW and QMAR is 0.74, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.74
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.82
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.84
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 5, 2021	0.84

The correlation between PSCW and QMAR has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.74 to 0.84 - a consistent structural relationship.

PSCW vs. QMAR - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	PSCW	QMAR
Technology	34.7%	54.2%
Financial Services	13.6%	0.2%
Consumer Cyclical	10.7%	12.2%
Communication Services	10.0%	15.5%
Healthcare	9.1%	4.2%
Industrials	7.7%	2.8%
Consumer Defensive	5.2%	7.6%
Energy	3.0%	0.6%
Utilities	2.4%	1.4%
Real Estate	2.0%	0.1%
Basic Materials	1.7%	1.2%

Return for Risk

PSCW vs. QMAR — Risk / Return Rank

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

PSCW

PSCW Risk / Return Rank: 97
PSCW Sharpe Ratio Rank: 95
PSCW Sortino Ratio Rank: 97
PSCW Omega Ratio Rank: 97
PSCW Calmar Ratio Rank: 96
PSCW Martin Ratio Rank: 97

QMAR

QMAR Risk / Return Rank: 96
QMAR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 95
QMAR Sortino Ratio Rank: 97
QMAR Omega Ratio Rank: 97
QMAR Calmar Ratio Rank: 94
QMAR Martin Ratio Rank: 97

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.

PSCW vs. QMAR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Pacer Swan SOS Conservative (April) ETF (PSCW) and FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March (QMAR). 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.

	PSCW	QMAR	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	3.84	3.86	-0.02
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	6.45	6.05	+0.40
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.90	1.93	-0.03
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	10.05	7.31	+2.75
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	51.44	52.66	-1.22
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

PSCW vs. QMAR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current PSCW Sharpe Ratio is 3.84, which is comparable to the QMAR Sharpe Ratio of 3.86. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of PSCW and QMAR, 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

	PSCW	QMAR	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	3.84	3.86	-0.02
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.95	0.87	+0.07
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.98	0.91	+0.07

Drawdowns

PSCW vs. QMAR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PSCW drawdown since its inception was -11.89%, smaller than the maximum QMAR drawdown of -19.83%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PSCW and QMAR.

Drawdown Indicators

	PSCW	QMAR	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-11.89%	-19.83%	+7.94%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-1.50%	-3.21%	+1.71%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-11.89%	-15.91%	+4.02%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-11.89%	-19.83%	+7.94%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.07%	-0.19%	+0.12%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.18%	-3.28%	+1.10%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.29%	0.45%	-0.16%

Volatility

PSCW vs. QMAR - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Pacer Swan SOS Conservative (April) ETF (PSCW) is 0.56%, while FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March (QMAR) has a volatility of 1.27%. This indicates that PSCW experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than QMAR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	PSCW	QMAR	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.56%	1.27%	-0.71%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	2.48%	4.85%	-2.37%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	3.92%	6.09%	-2.17%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	7.64%	13.97%	-6.33%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	7.59%	13.85%	-6.26%

PSCW vs. QMAR - Expense Ratio Comparison

PSCW has a 0.61% expense ratio, which is lower than QMAR's 0.90% expense ratio.

Dividends

PSCW vs. QMAR - Dividend Comparison

Neither PSCW nor QMAR has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both PSCW and QMAR in my portfolio?

PSCW and QMAR have a correlation of 0.74, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, PSCW or QMAR?

QMAR has higher volatility (1.27%) compared to PSCW (0.56%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PSCW dropped -11.89% vs QMAR's -19.83%.

Which ETF is better, PSCW or QMAR?

On 5-year performance, QMAR leads with 12.13% vs 7.19% for PSCW. On fees, PSCW is cheaper at 0.61% per year. On volatility, PSCW has been the lower-risk option at 0.56%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, PSCW or QMAR?

Over the 5-year period, QMAR has performed better with a 12.13% return vs 7.19%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, PSCW or QMAR?

PSCW is cheaper with a 0.61% expense ratio, compared with 0.90% for QMAR.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, PSCW or QMAR?

PSCW and QMAR have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

What is the main difference between PSCW and QMAR?

PSCW is categorized as Defined Outcome, while QMAR is Nasdaq-100. They also come from different issuers: Pacer and First Trust. Their fees differ too: 0.61% for PSCW and 0.90% for QMAR.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

QMAR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.86 vs 3.84), 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.