PSMO vs. PBFB

Last updated Aug 5, 2026

PSMO (Pacer Swan SOS Moderate (October) ETF) and PBFB (PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 20 ETF - February) are both Options Trading funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, PSMO returned 12.72% vs 11.78% for PBFB. Their correlation of 0.81 means they have usually moved in the same direction. PSMO charges 0.60%/yr vs 0.50%/yr for PBFB.

Performance

PSMO vs. PBFB - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Pacer Swan SOS Moderate (October) ETF (PSMO) and PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 20 ETF - February (PBFB). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, PSMO achieves a 7.47% return, which is significantly higher than PBFB's 6.27% return.

PSMO

• 1D: 0.34%
• 1M: 1.60%
• 6M: 6.82%
• YTD: 7.47%
• 1Y: 12.72%
• 3Y*: 12.18%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 10.25%

PBFB

• 1D: 0.39%
• 1M: 1.39%
• 6M: 5.53%
• YTD: 6.27%
• 1Y: 11.78%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 9.93%

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
PBFB PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 20 ETF - February	$127.41K	$109.85K	$131.68K
PSMO Pacer Swan SOS Moderate (October) ETF	$36.16K	$28.15K	$26.49K

PSMO vs. PBFB - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
PSMO Pacer Swan SOS Moderate (October) ETF	7.47%	11.44%	8.79%
PBFB PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 20 ETF - February	6.27%	9.86%	8.58%

Correlation

The correlation between PSMO and PBFB is 0.88, meaning they have usually moved in the same direction, including during past declines.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.88
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 1, 2024	0.81

The correlation between PSMO and PBFB has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.81 to 0.88 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

PSMO vs. PBFB — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

PSMO

PSMO Risk / Return Rank: 81
PSMO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 79
PSMO Sortino Ratio Rank: 84
PSMO Omega Ratio Rank: 85
PSMO Calmar Ratio Rank: 72
PSMO Martin Ratio Rank: 87

PBFB

PBFB Risk / Return Rank: 88
PBFB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 90
PBFB Sortino Ratio Rank: 91
PBFB Omega Ratio Rank: 92
PBFB Calmar Ratio Rank: 78
PBFB Martin Ratio Rank: 91

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

PSMO vs. PBFB - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Pacer Swan SOS Moderate (October) ETF (PSMO) and PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 20 ETF - February (PBFB). 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.

	PSMO	PBFB	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.03	2.40	-0.37
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.03	3.53	-0.50
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.40	1.49	-0.09
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.85	3.12	-0.27
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	14.17	16.22	-2.05

PSMO vs. PBFB - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current PSMO Sharpe Ratio is 2.03, which is comparable to the PBFB Sharpe Ratio of 2.40. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of PSMO and PBFB, 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

PSMO vs. PBFB - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PSMO drawdown since its inception was -9.77%, which is greater than PBFB's maximum drawdown of -8.65%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PSMO and PBFB.

Drawdown Indicators

	PSMO	PBFB	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-9.77%	-8.65%	-1.12%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-4.48%	-3.79%	-0.69%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-9.77%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.30%	-0.60%	-0.70%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.90%	0.73%	+0.17%

Volatility

PSMO vs. PBFB - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Pacer Swan SOS Moderate (October) ETF (PSMO) is 1.53%, while PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 20 ETF - February (PBFB) has a volatility of 1.66%. This indicates that PSMO experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than PBFB based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	PSMO	PBFB	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.53%	1.66%	-0.13%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	5.09%	4.20%	+0.89%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	6.33%	4.98%	+1.35%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	8.37%	6.39%	+1.98%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	8.37%	6.39%	+1.98%

PSMO vs. PBFB - Expense Ratio Comparison

PSMO has a 0.60% expense ratio, which is higher than PBFB's 0.50% expense ratio.

Dividends

PSMO vs. PBFB - Dividend Comparison

Neither PSMO nor PBFB has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both PSMO and PBFB in my portfolio?

PSMO and PBFB have a correlation of 0.88, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, PSMO or PBFB?

PBFB has higher volatility (1.66%) compared to PSMO (1.53%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PSMO dropped -9.77% vs PBFB's -8.65%.

Which ETF is better, PSMO or PBFB?

On 1-year performance, PSMO leads with 12.72% vs 11.78% for PBFB. On fees, PBFB is cheaper at 0.50% per year. On volatility, PSMO has been the lower-risk option at 1.53%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, PSMO or PBFB?

Over the 1-year period, PSMO has performed better with a 12.72% return vs 11.78%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, PSMO or PBFB?

PBFB is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for PSMO.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, PSMO or PBFB?

PSMO and PBFB have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

What is the main difference between PSMO and PBFB?

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

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

PBFB currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.40 vs 2.03), 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.