PSFM vs. CPRJ

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

PSFM (Pacer Swan SOS Flex (April) ETF) and CPRJ (Calamos Russell 2000 Structured Alt Protection ETF - July) are both Defined Outcome funds. PSFM is actively managed, while CPRJ is passively managed. Over the past year, PSFM returned 16.21% vs 9.25% for CPRJ. A 0.67 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. PSFM charges 0.61%/yr vs 0.69%/yr for CPRJ.

Performance

PSFM vs. CPRJ - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Pacer Swan SOS Flex (April) ETF (PSFM) and Calamos Russell 2000 Structured Alt Protection ETF - July (CPRJ). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, PSFM achieves a 8.72% return, which is significantly higher than CPRJ's 3.22% return.

PSFM

• 1D: -0.42%
• 1M: 0.09%
• YTD: 8.72%
• 6M: 8.75%
• 1Y: 16.21%
• 3Y*: 12.82%
• 5Y*: 9.70%
• 10Y*: —

CPRJ

• 1D: 0.00%
• 1M: 0.34%
• YTD: 3.22%
• 6M: 3.10%
• 1Y: 9.25%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

PSFM vs. CPRJ - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
PSFM Pacer Swan SOS Flex (April) ETF	8.72%	7.28%	6.40%
CPRJ Calamos Russell 2000 Structured Alt Protection ETF - July	3.22%	5.04%	3.95%

Correlation

The correlation between PSFM and CPRJ is 0.56, 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	0.56
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 1, 2024	0.67

The correlation between PSFM and CPRJ shifts across timeframes, from 0.56 (1 year) to 0.67 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

PSFM vs. CPRJ — Risk / Return Rank

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

PSFM

PSFM Risk / Return Rank: 97
PSFM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 96
PSFM Sortino Ratio Rank: 98
PSFM Omega Ratio Rank: 97
PSFM Calmar Ratio Rank: 98
PSFM Martin Ratio Rank: 98

CPRJ

CPRJ Risk / Return Rank: 94
CPRJ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 89
CPRJ Sortino Ratio Rank: 95
CPRJ Omega Ratio Rank: 96
CPRJ Calmar Ratio Rank: 96
CPRJ Martin Ratio Rank: 96

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.

PSFM vs. CPRJ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Pacer Swan SOS Flex (April) ETF (PSFM) and Calamos Russell 2000 Structured Alt Protection ETF - July (CPRJ). 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.

	PSFM	CPRJ	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	3.94	2.69	+1.25
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	6.70	4.69	+2.01
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.91	1.70	+0.21
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	11.01	7.79	+3.22
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	55.56	32.38	+23.18

PSFM vs. CPRJ - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current PSFM Sharpe Ratio is 3.94, which is higher than the CPRJ Sharpe Ratio of 2.69. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of PSFM and CPRJ, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

PSFM vs. CPRJ - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PSFM drawdown since its inception was -14.33%, which is greater than CPRJ's maximum drawdown of -6.25%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PSFM and CPRJ.

Drawdown Indicators

	PSFM	CPRJ	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-14.33%	-6.25%	-8.08%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-1.48%	-1.19%	-0.29%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-14.12%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-14.33%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.75%	0.00%	-0.75%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.25%	-0.86%	-1.39%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.29%	0.29%	0.00%

Volatility

PSFM vs. CPRJ - Volatility Comparison

Pacer Swan SOS Flex (April) ETF (PSFM) has a higher volatility of 1.74% compared to Calamos Russell 2000 Structured Alt Protection ETF - July (CPRJ) at 0.33%. This indicates that PSFM's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CPRJ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	PSFM	CPRJ	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.74%	0.33%	+1.41%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	3.29%	1.60%	+1.69%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	4.15%	3.52%	+0.63%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	10.58%	5.09%	+5.49%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	10.48%	5.09%	+5.39%

PSFM vs. CPRJ - Expense Ratio Comparison

PSFM has a 0.61% expense ratio, which is lower than CPRJ's 0.69% expense ratio.

Dividends

PSFM vs. CPRJ - Dividend Comparison

Neither PSFM nor CPRJ has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both PSFM and CPRJ in my portfolio?

PSFM and CPRJ have a correlation of 0.56, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, PSFM or CPRJ?

PSFM has higher volatility (1.74%) compared to CPRJ (0.33%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PSFM dropped -14.33% vs CPRJ's -6.25%.

Which ETF is better, PSFM or CPRJ?

On 1-year performance, PSFM leads with 16.21% vs 9.25% for CPRJ. On fees, PSFM is cheaper at 0.61% per year. On volatility, CPRJ has been the lower-risk option at 0.33%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, PSFM or CPRJ?

Over the 1-year period, PSFM has performed better with a 16.21% return vs 9.25%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, PSFM or CPRJ?

PSFM is cheaper with a 0.61% expense ratio, compared with 0.69% for CPRJ.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, PSFM or CPRJ?

PSFM and CPRJ have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

What is the main difference between PSFM and CPRJ?

They also come from different issuers: Pacer and Calamos. Their fees differ too: 0.61% for PSFM and 0.69% for CPRJ.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

PSFM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.94 vs 2.69), 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.