PSFO vs. FEBP

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

PSFO (Pacer Swan SOS Flex (October) ETF) and FEBP (PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 12 ETF - February) are both Options Trading funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, PSFO returned 17.64% vs 18.57% for FEBP. Their correlation of 0.88 suggests significant overlap in exposure. PSFO charges 0.60%/yr vs 0.50%/yr for FEBP.

Performance

PSFO vs. FEBP - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Pacer Swan SOS Flex (October) ETF (PSFO) and PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 12 ETF - February (FEBP). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both investments are quite close, with PSFO having a 6.62% return and FEBP slightly higher at 6.79%.

PSFO

• 1D: -0.19%
• 1M: 2.42%
• YTD: 6.62%
• 6M: 7.21%
• 1Y: 17.64%
• 3Y*: 13.19%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

FEBP

• 1D: -0.26%
• 1M: 2.45%
• YTD: 6.79%
• 6M: 7.87%
• 1Y: 18.57%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

PSFO vs. FEBP - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
PSFO Pacer Swan SOS Flex (October) ETF	6.62%	12.93%	9.17%
FEBP PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 12 ETF - February	6.79%	12.06%	12.73%

Correlation

The correlation between PSFO and FEBP is 0.94, 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	0.94
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 2, 2024	0.88

The correlation between PSFO and FEBP has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.88 to 0.94 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

PSFO vs. FEBP — Risk / Return Rank

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

PSFO

PSFO Risk / Return Rank: 77
PSFO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 75
PSFO Sortino Ratio Rank: 79
PSFO Omega Ratio Rank: 80
PSFO Calmar Ratio Rank: 69
PSFO Martin Ratio Rank: 83

FEBP

FEBP Risk / Return Rank: 82
FEBP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 83
FEBP Sortino Ratio Rank: 86
FEBP Omega Ratio Rank: 87
FEBP Calmar Ratio Rank: 69
FEBP Martin Ratio Rank: 85

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.

PSFO vs. FEBP - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Pacer Swan SOS Flex (October) ETF (PSFO) and PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 12 ETF - February (FEBP). 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.

	PSFO	FEBP	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.43	2.68	-0.25
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.54	3.85	-0.32
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.48	1.53	-0.06
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.41	3.41	0.00
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	16.51	17.60	-1.09
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

PSFO vs. FEBP - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current PSFO Sharpe Ratio is 2.43, which is comparable to the FEBP Sharpe Ratio of 2.68. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of PSFO and FEBP, 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

	PSFO	FEBP	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.43	2.68	-0.25
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.16	1.53	-0.37

Drawdowns

PSFO vs. FEBP - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PSFO drawdown since its inception was -12.09%, roughly equal to the maximum FEBP drawdown of -12.11%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PSFO and FEBP.

Drawdown Indicators

	PSFO	FEBP	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-12.09%	-12.11%	+0.02%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-5.20%	-5.47%	+0.27%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-12.09%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.19%	-0.26%	+0.07%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.75%	-0.91%	-0.84%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.07%	1.06%	+0.01%

Volatility

PSFO vs. FEBP - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Pacer Swan SOS Flex (October) ETF (PSFO) is 1.05%, while PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 12 ETF - February (FEBP) has a volatility of 1.42%. This indicates that PSFO experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FEBP based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	PSFO	FEBP	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.05%	1.42%	-0.37%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	5.49%	5.44%	+0.05%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	7.29%	6.96%	+0.33%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	10.05%	8.98%	+1.07%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	10.05%	8.98%	+1.07%

PSFO vs. FEBP - Expense Ratio Comparison

PSFO has a 0.60% expense ratio, which is higher than FEBP's 0.50% expense ratio.

Dividends

PSFO vs. FEBP - Dividend Comparison

Neither PSFO nor FEBP has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both PSFO and FEBP in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.94, PSFO and FEBP move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

Which is riskier, PSFO or FEBP?

FEBP has higher volatility (1.42%) compared to PSFO (1.05%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PSFO dropped -12.09% vs FEBP's -12.11%.

Which ETF is better, PSFO or FEBP?

On 1-year performance, FEBP leads with 18.57% vs 17.64% for PSFO. On fees, FEBP is cheaper at 0.50% per year. On volatility, PSFO has been the lower-risk option at 1.05%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, PSFO or FEBP?

Over the 1-year period, FEBP has performed better with a 18.57% return vs 17.64%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, PSFO or FEBP?

FEBP is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for PSFO.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, PSFO or FEBP?

PSFO and FEBP have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

What is the main difference between PSFO and FEBP?

They also come from different issuers: Pacer and PGIM. Their fees differ too: 0.60% for PSFO and 0.50% for FEBP.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FEBP currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.68 vs 2.43), 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.