PSFM vs. ZMAY

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

PSFM (Pacer Swan SOS Flex (April) ETF) and ZMAY (Innovator Equity Defined Protection ETF - 1 Yr May) are both Defined Outcome funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, PSFM returned 17.37% vs 5.95% for ZMAY. A 0.63 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. PSFM charges 0.61%/yr vs 0.79%/yr for ZMAY.

Performance

PSFM vs. ZMAY - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Pacer Swan SOS Flex (April) ETF (PSFM) and Innovator Equity Defined Protection ETF - 1 Yr May (ZMAY). 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 ZMAY's 2.20% return.

PSFM

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

ZMAY

• 1D: -0.06%
• 1M: 0.79%
• YTD: 2.20%
• 6M: 2.77%
• 1Y: 5.95%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

PSFM vs. ZMAY - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
PSFM Pacer Swan SOS Flex (April) ETF	9.21%	11.51%
ZMAY Innovator Equity Defined Protection ETF - 1 Yr May	2.20%	4.67%

Correlation

The correlation between PSFM and ZMAY is 0.61, 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	0.61
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 2, 2025	0.63

The correlation between PSFM and ZMAY has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.61 to 0.63 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

PSFM vs. ZMAY — 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

ZMAY

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

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. ZMAY - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Pacer Swan SOS Flex (April) ETF (PSFM) and Innovator Equity Defined Protection ETF - 1 Yr May (ZMAY). 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	ZMAY	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	4.37	4.12	+0.24
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	7.81	7.35	+0.46
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	2.03	1.96	+0.08
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	13.28	15.29	-2.00
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	70.48	70.95	-0.47
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. ZMAY - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current PSFM Sharpe Ratio is 4.37, which is comparable to the ZMAY Sharpe Ratio of 4.12. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of PSFM and ZMAY, 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	ZMAY	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	4.37	4.12	+0.24
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	4.24	-3.24

Drawdowns

PSFM vs. ZMAY - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PSFM drawdown since its inception was -14.33%, which is greater than ZMAY's maximum drawdown of -0.39%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PSFM and ZMAY.

Drawdown Indicators

	PSFM	ZMAY	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-14.33%	-0.39%	-13.94%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-1.31%	-0.39%	-0.92%
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%	-0.06%	-0.10%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.27%	-0.05%	-2.22%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.25%	0.08%	+0.17%

Volatility

PSFM vs. ZMAY - Volatility Comparison

Pacer Swan SOS Flex (April) ETF (PSFM) has a higher volatility of 0.86% compared to Innovator Equity Defined Protection ETF - 1 Yr May (ZMAY) at 0.53%. This indicates that PSFM's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than ZMAY based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	PSFM	ZMAY	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.86%	0.53%	+0.33%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	2.88%	1.06%	+1.82%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	4.01%	1.45%	+2.56%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	10.57%	1.52%	+9.05%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	10.51%	1.52%	+8.99%

PSFM vs. ZMAY - Expense Ratio Comparison

PSFM has a 0.61% expense ratio, which is lower than ZMAY's 0.79% expense ratio.

Dividends

PSFM vs. ZMAY - Dividend Comparison

Neither PSFM nor ZMAY has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both PSFM and ZMAY in my portfolio?

PSFM and ZMAY have a correlation of 0.61, 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 ZMAY?

PSFM has higher volatility (0.86%) compared to ZMAY (0.53%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PSFM dropped -14.33% vs ZMAY's -0.39%.

Which ETF is better, PSFM or ZMAY?

On 1-year performance, PSFM leads with 17.37% vs 5.95% for ZMAY. On fees, PSFM is cheaper at 0.61% per year. On volatility, ZMAY has been the lower-risk option at 0.53%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, PSFM or ZMAY?

Over the 1-year period, PSFM has performed better with a 17.37% return vs 5.95%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, PSFM or ZMAY?

PSFM is cheaper with a 0.61% expense ratio, compared with 0.79% for ZMAY.

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

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

What is the main difference between PSFM and ZMAY?

They also come from different issuers: Pacer and Innovator. Their fees differ too: 0.61% for PSFM and 0.79% for ZMAY.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

PSFM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (4.37 vs 4.12), 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.