PSFJ vs. QMAR
PSFJ (Pacer Swan SOS Flex (July) ETF) and QMAR (FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March) are both exchange-traded funds - PSFJ 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 3 years, PSFJ returned 15.35%/yr vs 16.73%/yr for QMAR. Their correlation of 0.85 suggests significant overlap in exposure. PSFJ charges 0.61%/yr vs 0.90%/yr for QMAR.
Performance
PSFJ vs. QMAR - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, PSFJ achieves a 5.52% return, which is significantly lower than QMAR's 13.06% return.
PSFJ
- 1D
- -0.01%
- 1M
- 1.64%
- YTD
- 5.52%
- 6M
- 6.21%
- 1Y
- 17.26%
- 3Y*
- 15.35%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
QMAR
- 1D
- -0.09%
- 1M
- 2.81%
- YTD
- 13.06%
- 6M
- 14.01%
- 1Y
- 23.38%
- 3Y*
- 16.73%
- 5Y*
- 12.13%
- 10Y*
- —
PSFJ vs. QMAR - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
PSFJ Pacer Swan SOS Flex (July) ETF | 5.52% | 13.75% | 16.08% | 20.25% | -3.81% | 5.37% |
QMAR FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March | 13.06% | 10.89% | 16.11% | 35.47% | -16.56% | 4.93% |
Correlation
The correlation between PSFJ and QMAR is 0.85, 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 | 0.85 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.82 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 2, 2021 | 0.85 |
The correlation between PSFJ and QMAR has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.82 to 0.85 - a consistent structural relationship.
PSFJ vs. QMAR - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
PSFJ
QMAR
Technology
Financial Services
Communication Services
Consumer Cyclical
Healthcare
Industrials
Consumer Defensive
Energy
Utilities
Real Estate
Basic Materials
Technology
PSFJ
QMAR
Financial Services
PSFJ
QMAR
Communication Services
PSFJ
QMAR
Consumer Cyclical
PSFJ
QMAR
Healthcare
PSFJ
QMAR
Industrials
PSFJ
QMAR
Consumer Defensive
PSFJ
QMAR
Energy
PSFJ
QMAR
Utilities
PSFJ
QMAR
Real Estate
PSFJ
QMAR
Basic Materials
PSFJ
QMAR
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
PSFJ vs. QMAR — Risk / Return Rank
PSFJ
QMAR
PSFJ vs. QMAR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Pacer Swan SOS Flex (July) ETF (PSFJ) 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.
| PSFJ | QMAR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -1.21 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -2.05 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.54 | 1.93 | -0.39 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.80 | 7.31 | -3.51 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 20.28 | 52.66 | -32.38 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| PSFJ | QMAR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.65 | 3.86 | -1.21 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | — | 0.87 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 1.10 | 0.91 | +0.19 |
Drawdowns
PSFJ vs. QMAR - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum PSFJ drawdown since its inception was -12.20%, smaller than the maximum QMAR drawdown of -19.83%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PSFJ and QMAR.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| PSFJ | QMAR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -12.20% | -19.83% | +7.63% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -4.56% | -3.21% | -1.35% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -12.20% | -15.91% | +3.71% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -19.83% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.01% | -0.19% | +0.18% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -1.78% | -3.28% | +1.50% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 0.85% | 0.45% | +0.40% |
Volatility
PSFJ vs. QMAR - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Pacer Swan SOS Flex (July) ETF (PSFJ) is 0.57%, while FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March (QMAR) has a volatility of 1.27%. This indicates that PSFJ 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.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| PSFJ | QMAR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 0.57% | 1.27% | -0.70% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 4.61% | 4.85% | -0.24% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 6.55% | 6.09% | +0.46% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 10.36% | 13.97% | -3.61% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 10.36% | 13.85% | -3.49% |
PSFJ vs. QMAR - Expense Ratio Comparison
PSFJ has a 0.61% expense ratio, which is lower than QMAR's 0.90% expense ratio.
Dividends
PSFJ vs. QMAR - Dividend Comparison
Neither PSFJ nor QMAR has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
PSFJ and QMAR have a correlation of 0.85, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
QMAR has higher volatility (1.27%) compared to PSFJ (0.57%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PSFJ dropped -12.20% vs QMAR's -19.83%.
On 3-year performance, QMAR leads with 16.73% vs 15.35% for PSFJ. On fees, PSFJ is cheaper at 0.61% per year. On volatility, PSFJ has been the lower-risk option at 0.57%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 3-year period, QMAR has performed better with a 16.73% return vs 15.35%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
PSFJ is cheaper with a 0.61% expense ratio, compared with 0.90% for QMAR.
PSFJ and QMAR have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.
PSFJ 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 PSFJ and 0.90% for QMAR.
QMAR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.86 vs 2.65), 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 PSFJ and QMAR
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