PSCX vs. BDGS
PSCX (Pacer Swan SOS Conservative (December) ETF) and BDGS (Bridges Capital Tactical ETF) are both Large Cap Blend Equities funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past 3 years, PSCX returned 12.42%/yr vs 13.55%/yr for BDGS. A 0.73 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. PSCX charges 0.75%/yr vs 0.87%/yr for BDGS.
Performance
PSCX vs. BDGS - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, PSCX achieves a 4.98% return, which is significantly higher than BDGS's 4.55% return.
PSCX
- 1D
- -0.12%
- 1M
- 0.42%
- YTD
- 4.98%
- 6M
- 5.15%
- 1Y
- 15.32%
- 3Y*
- 12.42%
- 5Y*
- 8.36%
- 10Y*
- —
BDGS
- 1D
- -0.74%
- 1M
- -0.80%
- YTD
- 4.55%
- 6M
- 4.54%
- 1Y
- 12.84%
- 3Y*
- 13.55%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
PSCX vs. BDGS - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
PSCX Pacer Swan SOS Conservative (December) ETF | 4.98% | 12.08% | 13.27% | 9.92% |
BDGS Bridges Capital Tactical ETF | 4.55% | 10.61% | 19.07% | 8.23% |
Correlation
The correlation between PSCX and BDGS is 0.76, 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 | 0.76 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.73 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 11, 2023 | 0.73 |
The correlation between PSCX and BDGS has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.73 to 0.76 - a consistent structural relationship.
PSCX vs. BDGS - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
PSCX
BDGS
Technology
Financial Services
Communication Services
Consumer Cyclical
Healthcare
Industrials
Consumer Defensive
Energy
Utilities
Real Estate
Basic Materials
Technology
PSCX
BDGS
Financial Services
PSCX
BDGS
Communication Services
PSCX
BDGS
Consumer Cyclical
PSCX
BDGS
Healthcare
PSCX
BDGS
Industrials
PSCX
BDGS
Consumer Defensive
PSCX
BDGS
Energy
PSCX
BDGS
Utilities
PSCX
BDGS
Real Estate
PSCX
BDGS
Basic Materials
PSCX
BDGS
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
PSCX vs. BDGS — Risk / Return Rank
PSCX
BDGS
PSCX vs. BDGS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Pacer Swan SOS Conservative (December) ETF (PSCX) and Bridges Capital Tactical ETF (BDGS). 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.
| PSCX | BDGS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.71 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +1.04 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.56 | 1.41 | +0.15 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.66 | 3.20 | +0.46 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 18.42 | 14.21 | +4.22 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
PSCX vs. BDGS - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum PSCX drawdown since its inception was -10.20%, which is greater than BDGS's maximum drawdown of -9.12%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PSCX and BDGS.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| PSCX | BDGS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -10.20% | -9.12% | -1.08% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -4.20% | -4.03% | -0.17% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -9.61% | -9.12% | -0.49% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -10.20% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.26% | -1.84% | +1.58% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -1.85% | -0.66% | -1.19% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 0.83% | 0.91% | -0.08% |
Volatility
PSCX vs. BDGS - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Pacer Swan SOS Conservative (December) ETF (PSCX) is 1.71%, while Bridges Capital Tactical ETF (BDGS) has a volatility of 2.28%. This indicates that PSCX experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than BDGS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| PSCX | BDGS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 1.71% | 2.28% | -0.57% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 4.49% | 5.16% | -0.67% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 5.63% | 6.38% | -0.75% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 7.11% | 8.23% | -1.12% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 6.97% | 8.23% | -1.26% |
PSCX vs. BDGS - Expense Ratio Comparison
PSCX has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is lower than BDGS's 0.87% expense ratio.
Dividends
PSCX vs. BDGS - Dividend Comparison
PSCX has not paid dividends to shareholders, while BDGS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.53%.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
BDGS Bridges Capital Tactical ETF | 0.53% | 0.55% | 1.81% | 0.84% |
PSCX Pacer Swan SOS Conservative (December) ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
PSCX and BDGS have a correlation of 0.76, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
BDGS has higher volatility (2.28%) compared to PSCX (1.71%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PSCX dropped -10.20% vs BDGS's -9.12%.
On 3-year performance, BDGS leads with 13.55% vs 12.42% for PSCX. On fees, PSCX is cheaper at 0.75% per year. On volatility, PSCX has been the lower-risk option at 1.71%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 3-year period, BDGS has performed better with a 13.55% return vs 12.42%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
PSCX is cheaper with a 0.75% expense ratio, compared with 0.87% for BDGS.
BDGS has the higher dividend yield at 0.53%, compared with 0.00% for PSCX.
They also come from different issuers: Pacer and Bridges. Their fees differ too: 0.75% for PSCX and 0.87% for BDGS.
PSCX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.74 vs 2.03), 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 PSCX and BDGS
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