PSFO vs. GMAR

Last updated Jun 26, 2026

PSFO (Pacer Swan SOS Flex (October) ETF) and GMAR (FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Moderate Buffer ETF - March) are both Options Trading funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past 3 years, PSFO returned 12.46%/yr vs 11.85%/yr for GMAR. Their correlation of 0.83 suggests significant overlap in exposure. PSFO charges 0.60%/yr vs 0.85%/yr for GMAR.

Performance

PSFO vs. GMAR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Pacer Swan SOS Flex (October) ETF (PSFO) and FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Moderate Buffer ETF - March (GMAR). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, PSFO achieves a 5.83% return, which is significantly lower than GMAR's 7.40% return.

PSFO

• 1D: 0.04%
• 1M: -0.37%
• YTD: 5.83%
• 6M: 5.24%
• 1Y: 15.17%
• 3Y*: 12.46%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

GMAR

• 1D: 0.07%
• 1M: -0.26%
• YTD: 7.40%
• 6M: 7.48%
• 1Y: 13.65%
• 3Y*: 11.85%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

PSFO vs. GMAR - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
PSFO Pacer Swan SOS Flex (October) ETF	5.83%	12.93%	10.78%	17.14%
GMAR FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Moderate Buffer ETF - March	7.40%	9.29%	12.14%	12.40%

Correlation

The correlation between PSFO and GMAR is 0.85, 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	0.85
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.82
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 20, 2023	0.83

The correlation between PSFO and GMAR has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.82 to 0.85 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

PSFO vs. GMAR — Risk / Return Rank

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

PSFO

PSFO Risk / Return Rank: 75
PSFO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 74
PSFO Sortino Ratio Rank: 77
PSFO Omega Ratio Rank: 78
PSFO Calmar Ratio Rank: 67
PSFO Martin Ratio Rank: 81

GMAR

GMAR Risk / Return Rank: 97
GMAR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 96
GMAR Sortino Ratio Rank: 97
GMAR Omega Ratio Rank: 97
GMAR Calmar Ratio Rank: 96
GMAR 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.

PSFO vs. GMAR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Pacer Swan SOS Flex (October) ETF (PSFO) and FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Moderate Buffer ETF - March (GMAR). 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.

	PSFO	GMAR	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.08	3.50	-1.41
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.02	5.76	-2.74
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.40	1.87	-0.47
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.93	7.64	-4.71
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	13.96	48.91	-34.95

PSFO vs. GMAR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current PSFO Sharpe Ratio is 2.08, which is lower than the GMAR Sharpe Ratio of 3.50. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of PSFO and GMAR, 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

PSFO vs. GMAR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PSFO drawdown since its inception was -12.09%, which is greater than GMAR's maximum drawdown of -9.11%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PSFO and GMAR.

Drawdown Indicators

	PSFO	GMAR	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-12.09%	-9.11%	-2.98%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-5.20%	-1.79%	-3.41%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-12.09%	-9.11%	-2.98%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.98%	-0.65%	-0.33%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.74%	-0.54%	-1.20%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.09%	0.28%	+0.81%

Volatility

PSFO vs. GMAR - Volatility Comparison

Pacer Swan SOS Flex (October) ETF (PSFO) has a higher volatility of 2.00% compared to FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Moderate Buffer ETF - March (GMAR) at 1.42%. This indicates that PSFO's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than GMAR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	PSFO	GMAR	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.00%	1.42%	+0.58%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	5.66%	3.26%	+2.40%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	7.32%	3.92%	+3.40%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	10.03%	6.82%	+3.21%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	10.03%	6.82%	+3.21%

PSFO vs. GMAR - Expense Ratio Comparison

PSFO has a 0.60% expense ratio, which is lower than GMAR's 0.85% expense ratio.

Dividends

PSFO vs. GMAR - Dividend Comparison

Neither PSFO nor GMAR has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both PSFO and GMAR in my portfolio?

PSFO and GMAR have a correlation of 0.85, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, PSFO or GMAR?

PSFO has higher volatility (2.00%) compared to GMAR (1.42%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PSFO dropped -12.09% vs GMAR's -9.11%.

Which ETF is better, PSFO or GMAR?

On 3-year performance, PSFO leads with 12.46% vs 11.85% for GMAR. On fees, PSFO is cheaper at 0.60% per year. On volatility, GMAR has been the lower-risk option at 1.42%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, PSFO or GMAR?

Over the 3-year period, PSFO has performed better with a 12.46% return vs 11.85%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, PSFO or GMAR?

PSFO is cheaper with a 0.60% expense ratio, compared with 0.85% for GMAR.

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

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

What is the main difference between PSFO and GMAR?

They also come from different issuers: Pacer and FT Vest. Their fees differ too: 0.60% for PSFO and 0.85% for GMAR.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

GMAR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.50 vs 2.08), 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.