PSFD vs. SAMT

Last updated Jun 3, 2026

PSFD (Pacer Swan SOS Flex (December) ETF) and SAMT (Strategas Macro Thematic Opportunities ETF) are both Large Cap Blend Equities funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past 3 years, PSFD returned 15.00%/yr vs 29.13%/yr for SAMT. A 0.73 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. PSFD charges 0.75%/yr vs 0.66%/yr for SAMT.

Performance

PSFD vs. SAMT - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Pacer Swan SOS Flex (December) ETF (PSFD) and Strategas Macro Thematic Opportunities ETF (SAMT). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, PSFD achieves a 6.69% return, which is significantly lower than SAMT's 21.06% return.

PSFD

• 1D: 0.00%
• 1M: 2.33%
• YTD: 6.69%
• 6M: 7.90%
• 1Y: 18.41%
• 3Y*: 15.00%
• 5Y*: 11.94%
• 10Y*: —

SAMT

• 1D: 2.12%
• 1M: 7.74%
• YTD: 21.06%
• 6M: 25.55%
• 1Y: 43.51%
• 3Y*: 29.13%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

PSFD vs. SAMT - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
PSFD Pacer Swan SOS Flex (December) ETF	6.69%	12.93%	14.54%	20.95%	2.90%
SAMT Strategas Macro Thematic Opportunities ETF	21.06%	33.10%	28.15%	1.27%	-6.59%

Correlation

The correlation between PSFD and SAMT is 0.62, 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	0.62
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.68
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 26, 2022	0.73

The correlation between PSFD and SAMT shifts across timeframes, from 0.62 (1 year) to 0.73 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

PSFD vs. SAMT - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	PSFD	SAMT
Technology	36.2%	27.8%
Financial Services	11.9%	5.6%
Communication Services	10.9%	7.8%
Consumer Cyclical	10.1%	5.6%
Healthcare	8.4%	4.3%
Industrials	8.1%	22.0%
Consumer Defensive	4.9%	12.0%
Energy	3.5%	2.9%
Utilities	2.3%	6.6%
Real Estate	1.9%	2.9%
Basic Materials	1.8%	2.7%

Return for Risk

PSFD vs. SAMT — Risk / Return Rank

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

PSFD

PSFD Risk / Return Rank: 80
PSFD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 82
PSFD Sortino Ratio Rank: 87
PSFD Omega Ratio Rank: 88
PSFD Calmar Ratio Rank: 63
PSFD Martin Ratio Rank: 81

SAMT

SAMT Risk / Return Rank: 79
SAMT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 80
SAMT Sortino Ratio Rank: 76
SAMT Omega Ratio Rank: 73
SAMT Calmar Ratio Rank: 89
SAMT Martin Ratio Rank: 77

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.

PSFD vs. SAMT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Pacer Swan SOS Flex (December) ETF (PSFD) and Strategas Macro Thematic Opportunities ETF (SAMT). 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.

	PSFD	SAMT	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	2.72	2.62	+0.10
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	4.01	3.45	+0.56
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.57	1.44	+0.13
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.20	5.47	-2.27
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	16.43	15.12	+1.30
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

PSFD vs. SAMT - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current PSFD Sharpe Ratio is 2.72, which is comparable to the SAMT Sharpe Ratio of 2.62. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of PSFD and SAMT, 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

	PSFD	SAMT	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.72	2.62	+0.10
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	1.14	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.25	0.99	+0.26

Drawdowns

PSFD vs. SAMT - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PSFD drawdown since its inception was -14.94%, smaller than the maximum SAMT drawdown of -20.57%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PSFD and SAMT.

Drawdown Indicators

	PSFD	SAMT	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-14.94%	-20.57%	+5.63%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-5.88%	-8.15%	+2.27%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-12.26%	-18.27%	+6.01%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-14.94%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.02%	-7.73%	+5.71%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.15%	2.95%	-1.80%

Volatility

PSFD vs. SAMT - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Pacer Swan SOS Flex (December) ETF (PSFD) is 1.16%, while Strategas Macro Thematic Opportunities ETF (SAMT) has a volatility of 6.75%. This indicates that PSFD experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than SAMT based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	PSFD	SAMT	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.16%	6.75%	-5.59%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	5.61%	12.59%	-6.98%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	6.80%	16.67%	-9.87%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	10.48%	16.94%	-6.46%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	10.43%	16.94%	-6.51%

PSFD vs. SAMT - Expense Ratio Comparison

PSFD has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is higher than SAMT's 0.66% expense ratio.

Dividends

PSFD vs. SAMT - Dividend Comparison

PSFD has not paid dividends to shareholders, while SAMT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.58%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022
PSFD Pacer Swan SOS Flex (December) ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
SAMT Strategas Macro Thematic Opportunities ETF	0.58%	0.70%	1.40%	1.49%	0.73%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both PSFD and SAMT in my portfolio?

PSFD and SAMT have a correlation of 0.62, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, PSFD or SAMT?

SAMT has higher volatility (6.75%) compared to PSFD (1.16%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PSFD dropped -14.94% vs SAMT's -20.57%.

Which ETF is better, PSFD or SAMT?

On 3-year performance, SAMT leads with 29.13% vs 15.00% for PSFD. On fees, SAMT is cheaper at 0.66% per year. On volatility, PSFD has been the lower-risk option at 1.16%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, PSFD or SAMT?

Over the 3-year period, SAMT has performed better with a 29.13% return vs 15.00%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, PSFD or SAMT?

SAMT is cheaper with a 0.66% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for PSFD.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, PSFD or SAMT?

SAMT has the higher dividend yield at 0.58%, compared with 0.00% for PSFD.

What is the main difference between PSFD and SAMT?

They also come from different issuers: Pacer and Strategas. Their fees differ too: 0.75% for PSFD and 0.66% for SAMT.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

PSFD currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.72 vs 2.62), 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.