PSFM vs. FBUF

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

PSFM (Pacer Swan SOS Flex (April) ETF) and FBUF (Fidelity Dynamic Buffered Equity ETF) are both Defined Outcome funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, PSFM returned 17.37% vs 19.61% for FBUF. Their correlation of 0.83 suggests significant overlap in exposure. PSFM charges 0.61%/yr vs 0.48%/yr for FBUF.

Performance

PSFM vs. FBUF - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Pacer Swan SOS Flex (April) ETF (PSFM) and Fidelity Dynamic Buffered Equity ETF (FBUF). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, PSFM achieves a 9.21% return, which is significantly higher than FBUF's 5.32% return.

PSFM

• 1D: -0.16%
• 1M: 1.92%
• YTD: 9.21%
• 6M: 10.00%
• 1Y: 17.37%
• 3Y*: 13.46%
• 5Y*: 10.00%
• 10Y*: —

FBUF

• 1D: -0.12%
• 1M: 2.85%
• YTD: 5.32%
• 6M: 6.28%
• 1Y: 19.61%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

PSFM vs. FBUF - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
PSFM Pacer Swan SOS Flex (April) ETF	9.21%	7.28%	10.59%
FBUF Fidelity Dynamic Buffered Equity ETF	5.32%	14.01%	10.13%

Correlation

The correlation between PSFM and FBUF 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 (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 12, 2024	0.83

The correlation between PSFM and FBUF has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.76 to 0.83 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

PSFM vs. FBUF — Risk / Return Rank

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

PSFM

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

FBUF

FBUF Risk / Return Rank: 79
FBUF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 80
FBUF Sortino Ratio Rank: 79
FBUF Omega Ratio Rank: 86
FBUF Calmar Ratio Rank: 70
FBUF Martin Ratio Rank: 80

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. FBUF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Pacer Swan SOS Flex (April) ETF (PSFM) and Fidelity Dynamic Buffered Equity ETF (FBUF). 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.

	PSFM	FBUF	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	4.37	2.63	+1.74
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	7.81	3.55	+4.26
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	2.03	1.53	+0.50
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	13.28	3.51	+9.77
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	70.48	15.68	+54.80
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

PSFM vs. FBUF - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current PSFM Sharpe Ratio is 4.37, which is higher than the FBUF Sharpe Ratio of 2.63. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of PSFM and FBUF, 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

	PSFM	FBUF	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	4.37	2.63	+1.74
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.95	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.00	1.47	-0.47

Drawdowns

PSFM vs. FBUF - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PSFM drawdown since its inception was -14.33%, which is greater than FBUF's maximum drawdown of -11.09%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PSFM and FBUF.

Drawdown Indicators

	PSFM	FBUF	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-14.33%	-11.09%	-3.24%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-1.31%	-5.61%	+4.30%
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	-0.16%	-0.22%	+0.06%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.27%	-1.38%	-0.89%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.25%	1.25%	-1.00%

Volatility

PSFM vs. FBUF - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Pacer Swan SOS Flex (April) ETF (PSFM) is 0.86%, while Fidelity Dynamic Buffered Equity ETF (FBUF) has a volatility of 1.11%. This indicates that PSFM experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FBUF based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	PSFM	FBUF	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.86%	1.11%	-0.25%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	2.88%	5.37%	-2.49%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	4.01%	7.49%	-3.48%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	10.57%	9.55%	+1.02%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	10.51%	9.55%	+0.96%

PSFM vs. FBUF - Expense Ratio Comparison

PSFM has a 0.61% expense ratio, which is higher than FBUF's 0.48% expense ratio.

Dividends

PSFM vs. FBUF - Dividend Comparison

PSFM has not paid dividends to shareholders, while FBUF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.63%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024
FBUF Fidelity Dynamic Buffered Equity ETF	0.63%	0.64%	0.54%
PSFM Pacer Swan SOS Flex (April) ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both PSFM and FBUF in my portfolio?

PSFM and FBUF 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.

Which is riskier, PSFM or FBUF?

FBUF has higher volatility (1.11%) compared to PSFM (0.86%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PSFM dropped -14.33% vs FBUF's -11.09%.

Which ETF is better, PSFM or FBUF?

On 1-year performance, FBUF leads with 19.61% vs 17.37% for PSFM. On fees, FBUF is cheaper at 0.48% per year. On volatility, PSFM has been the lower-risk option at 0.86%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, PSFM or FBUF?

Over the 1-year period, FBUF has performed better with a 19.61% return vs 17.37%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, PSFM or FBUF?

FBUF is cheaper with a 0.48% expense ratio, compared with 0.61% for PSFM.

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

FBUF has the higher dividend yield at 0.63%, compared with 0.00% for PSFM.

What is the main difference between PSFM and FBUF?

They also come from different issuers: Pacer and Fidelity. Their fees differ too: 0.61% for PSFM and 0.48% for FBUF.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

PSFM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (4.37 vs 2.63), 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.