PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
PSFM vs. GCOW
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

PSFM vs. GCOW - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Pacer Swan SOS Flex (April) ETF (PSFM) and Pacer Global Cash Cows Dividend ETF (GCOW). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, PSFM achieves a 9.21% return, which is significantly lower than GCOW's 12.18% return.


PSFM

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

GCOW

1D
-0.56%
1M
0.09%
YTD
12.18%
6M
13.23%
1Y
27.12%
3Y*
17.41%
5Y*
12.34%
10Y*
9.91%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

PSFM vs. GCOW - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024202320222021
PSFM
Pacer Swan SOS Flex (April) ETF
9.21%7.28%14.18%18.32%-5.23%11.65%
GCOW
Pacer Global Cash Cows Dividend ETF
12.18%27.34%3.52%13.95%5.49%5.70%

Correlation

The correlation between PSFM and GCOW is 0.28, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.28

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.43

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.54

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 5, 2021

0.55

Over the past year, the correlation between PSFM and GCOW has dropped to 0.28 - well below their long-term average of 0.55, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

PSFM vs. GCOW - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
PSFM
GCOW

Technology

33.2%
0.9%

Financial Services

12.5%

-

Communication Services

10.3%
14.6%

Consumer Cyclical

10.0%
4.6%

Healthcare

9.6%
14.6%

Industrials

8.4%
12.4%

Consumer Defensive

5.4%
17.1%

Energy

4.2%
24.4%

Utilities

2.6%
4.1%

Real Estate

2.0%

-

Basic Materials

1.9%
7.3%

Technology

PSFM
33.2%
GCOW
0.9%

Financial Services

PSFM
12.5%
GCOW

-

Communication Services

PSFM
10.3%
GCOW
14.6%

Consumer Cyclical

PSFM
10.0%
GCOW
4.6%

Healthcare

PSFM
9.6%
GCOW
14.6%

Industrials

PSFM
8.4%
GCOW
12.4%

Consumer Defensive

PSFM
5.4%
GCOW
17.1%

Energy

PSFM
4.2%
GCOW
24.4%

Utilities

PSFM
2.6%
GCOW
4.1%

Real Estate

PSFM
2.0%
GCOW

-

Basic Materials

PSFM
1.9%
GCOW
7.3%

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

PSFM vs. GCOW — Risk / Return Rank

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

PSFM
PSFM Risk / Return Rank: 9898
Overall Rank
PSFM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9696
Sharpe Ratio Rank
PSFM Sortino Ratio Rank: 9898
Sortino Ratio Rank
PSFM Omega Ratio Rank: 9898
Omega Ratio Rank
PSFM Calmar Ratio Rank: 9898
Calmar Ratio Rank
PSFM Martin Ratio Rank: 9898
Martin Ratio Rank

GCOW
GCOW Risk / Return Rank: 7979
Overall Rank
GCOW Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7676
Sharpe Ratio Rank
GCOW Sortino Ratio Rank: 7979
Sortino Ratio Rank
GCOW Omega Ratio Rank: 7272
Omega Ratio Rank
GCOW Calmar Ratio Rank: 9090
Calmar Ratio Rank
GCOW Martin Ratio Rank: 7777
Martin Ratio Rank
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. GCOW - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Pacer Swan SOS Flex (April) ETF (PSFM) and Pacer Global Cash Cows Dividend ETF (GCOW). 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.


PSFMGCOWDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+1.85

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+4.19

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

2.03

1.44

+0.60

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

13.28

5.71

+7.57

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

70.48

15.05

+55.43

PSFM vs. GCOW - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current PSFM Sharpe Ratio is 4.37, which is higher than the GCOW Sharpe Ratio of 2.52. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of PSFM and GCOW, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


PSFMGCOWDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

4.37

2.52

+1.85

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.95

0.92

+0.03

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.61

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

1.00

0.59

+0.42

Drawdowns

PSFM vs. GCOW - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PSFM drawdown since its inception was -14.33%, smaller than the maximum GCOW drawdown of -37.64%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PSFM and GCOW.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


PSFMGCOWDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-14.33%

-37.64%

+23.31%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-1.31%

-4.77%

+3.46%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-14.12%

-12.35%

-1.77%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-14.33%

-21.48%

+7.15%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-37.64%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.16%

-2.73%

+2.57%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-2.27%

-5.84%

+3.57%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

0.25%

1.81%

-1.56%

Volatility

PSFM vs. GCOW - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Pacer Swan SOS Flex (April) ETF (PSFM) is 0.86%, while Pacer Global Cash Cows Dividend ETF (GCOW) has a volatility of 2.85%. This indicates that PSFM experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than GCOW based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


PSFMGCOWDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

0.86%

2.85%

-1.99%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

2.88%

7.99%

-5.11%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

4.01%

10.81%

-6.80%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

10.57%

13.49%

-2.92%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

10.51%

16.20%

-5.69%

PSFM vs. GCOW - Expense Ratio Comparison

PSFM has a 0.61% expense ratio, which is higher than GCOW's 0.60% expense ratio.


Dividends

PSFM vs. GCOW - Dividend Comparison

PSFM has not paid dividends to shareholders, while GCOW's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.43%.


PositionTTM2025202420232022202120202019201820172016
GCOW
Pacer Global Cash Cows Dividend ETF
4.43%4.06%5.14%5.28%4.39%4.23%4.12%4.40%3.94%2.79%1.95%
PSFM
Pacer Swan SOS Flex (April) ETF
0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


PSFM and GCOW have a correlation of 0.28, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

GCOW has higher volatility (2.85%) compared to PSFM (0.86%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PSFM dropped -14.33% vs GCOW's -37.64%.

On 5-year performance, GCOW leads with 12.34% vs 10.00% for PSFM. On fees, GCOW is cheaper at 0.60% 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.

Over the 5-year period, GCOW has performed better with a 12.34% return vs 10.00%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

GCOW is cheaper with a 0.60% expense ratio, compared with 0.61% for PSFM.

GCOW has the higher dividend yield at 4.43%, compared with 0.00% for PSFM.

PSFM is categorized as Defined Outcome, while GCOW is Large Cap Value Equities. Their fees differ too: 0.61% for PSFM and 0.60% for GCOW.

PSFM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (4.37 vs 2.52), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for PSFM and GCOW

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