PSCX vs. QMAR

Last updated Apr 1, 2026

Compare and contrast key facts about Pacer Swan SOS Conservative (December) ETF (PSCX) and FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March (QMAR).

PSCX and QMAR are both exchange-traded funds (ETFs), meaning they are traded on stock exchanges and can be bought and sold throughout the day. PSCX is an actively managed fund by Pacer. It was launched on Dec 22, 2020. QMAR is an actively managed fund by First Trust. It was launched on Mar 19, 2021.

Performance

PSCX vs. QMAR - Performance Comparison

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

PSCX vs. QMAR - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
PSCX Pacer Swan SOS Conservative (December) ETF	-1.88%	12.08%	13.27%	16.57%	-7.35%	6.73%
QMAR FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March	1.87%	10.89%	16.11%	35.47%	-16.56%	12.31%

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, PSCX achieves a -1.88% return, which is significantly lower than QMAR's 1.87% return.

PSCX

• 1D: 1.43%
• 1M: -2.32%
• YTD: -1.88%
• 6M: 0.91%
• 1Y: 12.02%
• 3Y*: 11.44%
• 5Y*: 7.30%
• 10Y*: —

QMAR

• 1D: 2.41%
• 1M: 0.75%
• YTD: 1.87%
• 6M: 4.47%
• 1Y: 18.84%
• 3Y*: 14.87%
• 5Y*: 10.44%
• 10Y*: —

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

PSCX vs. QMAR - Expense Ratio Comparison

PSCX has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is lower than QMAR's 0.90% expense ratio.

QMAR

FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March

PSCX

Pacer Swan SOS Conservative (December) ETF

Return for Risk

PSCX vs. QMAR — Risk / Return Rank

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

PSCX

PSCX Risk / Return Rank: 79
PSCX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 75
PSCX Sortino Ratio Rank: 79
PSCX Omega Ratio Rank: 82
PSCX Calmar Ratio Rank: 75
PSCX Martin Ratio Rank: 85

QMAR

QMAR Risk / Return Rank: 85
QMAR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 78
QMAR Sortino Ratio Rank: 85
QMAR Omega Ratio Rank: 95
QMAR Calmar Ratio Rank: 76
QMAR 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.

PSCX vs. QMAR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Pacer Swan SOS Conservative (December) ETF (PSCX) 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.

	PSCX	QMAR	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	1.37	1.43	-0.06
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	2.05	2.27	-0.22
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.32	1.46	-0.14
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.99	2.03	-0.04
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	10.21	14.07	-3.86
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

PSCX vs. QMAR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current PSCX Sharpe Ratio is 1.37, which is comparable to the QMAR Sharpe Ratio of 1.43. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of PSCX and QMAR, offering insights into how both investments have performed under varying market conditions. These values are calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	PSCX	QMAR	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.37	1.43	-0.06
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	1.04	0.75	+0.29
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.10	0.76	+0.34

Correlation

The correlation between PSCX and QMAR is 0.81, which is considered to be high. That indicates a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Having highly-correlated positions in a portfolio may signal a lack of diversification, potentially leading to increased risk during market downturns.

Dividends

PSCX vs. QMAR - Dividend Comparison

Neither PSCX nor QMAR has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Drawdowns

PSCX vs. QMAR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PSCX drawdown since its inception was -10.20%, smaller than the maximum QMAR drawdown of -19.83%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PSCX and QMAR.

Drawdown Indicators

	PSCX	QMAR	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-10.20%	-19.83%	+9.63%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-6.15%	-9.23%	+3.08%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-10.20%	-19.83%	+9.63%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.84%	-0.88%	-1.96%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.92%	-3.40%	+1.48%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.20%	1.33%	-0.13%

Volatility

PSCX vs. QMAR - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Pacer Swan SOS Conservative (December) ETF (PSCX) is 2.81%, while FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March (QMAR) has a volatility of 3.50%. This indicates that PSCX 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

	PSCX	QMAR	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.81%	3.50%	-0.69%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	4.31%	4.62%	-0.31%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	8.83%	13.25%	-4.42%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	7.06%	14.05%	-6.99%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	7.02%	14.03%	-7.01%