PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
PWS vs. PTNQ
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

PWS vs. PTNQ - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Pacer WealthShield ETF (PWS) and Pacer Trendpilot 100 ETF (PTNQ). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, PWS achieves a -2.18% return, which is significantly lower than PTNQ's 14.10% return.


PWS

1D
1.03%
1M
-0.99%
YTD
-2.18%
6M
-3.95%
1Y
7.28%
3Y*
7.37%
5Y*
0.31%
10Y*

PTNQ

1D
-0.20%
1M
10.71%
YTD
14.10%
6M
12.48%
1Y
33.00%
3Y*
15.46%
5Y*
11.87%
10Y*
16.24%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

PWS vs. PTNQ - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
PWS
Pacer WealthShield ETF
-2.18%8.05%14.01%-3.58%-12.10%14.43%22.16%1.36%-3.29%0.96%
PTNQ
Pacer Trendpilot 100 ETF
14.10%7.18%15.47%34.65%-16.00%13.16%29.38%24.00%8.51%0.49%

Correlation

The correlation between PWS and PTNQ is 0.67, 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

0.67

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

0.63

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

0.53

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 13, 2017

0.50

The correlation between PWS and PTNQ shifts across timeframes, from 0.50 (all time) to 0.67 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

PWS vs. PTNQ - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
PWS
PTNQ

Healthcare

39.6%
5.3%

Technology

20.6%
53.2%

Consumer Cyclical

19.7%
12.9%

Industrials

19.0%
4.3%

Utilities

0.8%
1.4%

Communication Services

0.2%
16.1%

Energy

0.0%
0.5%

Basic Materials

-

1.1%

Consumer Defensive

-

4.8%

Financial Services

-

0.3%

Real Estate

-

0.1%

Healthcare

PWS
39.6%
PTNQ
5.3%

Technology

PWS
20.6%
PTNQ
53.2%

Consumer Cyclical

PWS
19.7%
PTNQ
12.9%

Industrials

PWS
19.0%
PTNQ
4.3%

Utilities

PWS
0.8%
PTNQ
1.4%

Communication Services

PWS
0.2%
PTNQ
16.1%

Energy

PWS
0.0%
PTNQ
0.5%

Basic Materials

PWS

-

PTNQ
1.1%

Consumer Defensive

PWS

-

PTNQ
4.8%

Financial Services

PWS

-

PTNQ
0.3%

Real Estate

PWS

-

PTNQ
0.1%

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

PWS vs. PTNQ — Risk / Return Rank

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

PWS
PWS Risk / Return Rank: 2121
Overall Rank
PWS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1919
Sharpe Ratio Rank
PWS Sortino Ratio Rank: 1919
Sortino Ratio Rank
PWS Omega Ratio Rank: 1919
Omega Ratio Rank
PWS Calmar Ratio Rank: 2424
Calmar Ratio Rank
PWS Martin Ratio Rank: 2222
Martin Ratio Rank

PTNQ
PTNQ Risk / Return Rank: 5858
Overall Rank
PTNQ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6363
Sharpe Ratio Rank
PTNQ Sortino Ratio Rank: 5959
Sortino Ratio Rank
PTNQ Omega Ratio Rank: 5959
Omega Ratio Rank
PTNQ Calmar Ratio Rank: 5656
Calmar Ratio Rank
PTNQ Martin Ratio Rank: 5555
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.

PWS vs. PTNQ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Pacer WealthShield ETF (PWS) and Pacer Trendpilot 100 ETF (PTNQ). 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.


PWSPTNQDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-1.49

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-1.84

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.12

1.36

-0.24

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.06

2.82

-1.76

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

2.64

9.57

-6.93

PWS vs. PTNQ - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current PWS Sharpe Ratio is 0.64, which is lower than the PTNQ Sharpe Ratio of 2.13. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of PWS and PTNQ, 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


PWSPTNQDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.64

2.13

-1.49

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.03

0.93

-0.90

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.99

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.29

0.81

-0.52

Drawdowns

PWS vs. PTNQ - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PWS drawdown since its inception was -24.93%, smaller than the maximum PTNQ drawdown of -28.07%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PWS and PTNQ.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


PWSPTNQDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-24.93%

-28.07%

+3.14%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-6.88%

-11.76%

+4.88%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-10.47%

-14.19%

+3.72%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-24.93%

-18.47%

-6.46%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-28.07%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-5.92%

-0.20%

-5.72%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-9.11%

-5.69%

-3.42%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.76%

3.46%

-0.70%

Volatility

PWS vs. PTNQ - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Pacer WealthShield ETF (PWS) is 2.64%, while Pacer Trendpilot 100 ETF (PTNQ) has a volatility of 4.63%. This indicates that PWS experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than PTNQ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


PWSPTNQDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

2.64%

4.63%

-1.99%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

7.18%

11.48%

-4.30%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

11.47%

15.56%

-4.09%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

11.93%

12.90%

-0.97%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

14.39%

16.37%

-1.98%

PWS vs. PTNQ - Expense Ratio Comparison

PWS has a 0.60% expense ratio, which is lower than PTNQ's 0.65% expense ratio.


Dividends

PWS vs. PTNQ - Dividend Comparison

PWS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.49%, more than PTNQ's 0.77% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
PTNQ
Pacer Trendpilot 100 ETF
0.77%0.88%1.96%1.47%0.62%0.00%0.16%0.44%0.45%0.32%0.30%0.22%
PWS
Pacer WealthShield ETF
1.49%1.59%1.33%2.21%1.45%0.94%0.53%1.77%1.16%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


PWS and PTNQ have a correlation of 0.67, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

PTNQ has higher volatility (4.63%) compared to PWS (2.64%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PWS dropped -24.93% vs PTNQ's -28.07%.

On 5-year performance, PTNQ leads with 11.87% vs 0.31% for PWS. On fees, PWS is cheaper at 0.60% per year. On volatility, PWS has been the lower-risk option at 2.64%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 5-year period, PTNQ has performed better with a 11.87% return vs 0.31%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

PWS is cheaper with a 0.60% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for PTNQ.

PWS has the higher dividend yield at 1.49%, compared with 0.77% for PTNQ.

PWS is categorized as Diversified Portfolio, while PTNQ is Large Cap Blend Equities. PWS tracks Pacer WealthShield Index, while PTNQ tracks Pacer NASDAQ-100 Trendpilot Index. Their fees differ too: 0.60% for PWS and 0.65% for PTNQ.

PTNQ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.13 vs 0.64), 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 PWS and PTNQ

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