SAMT vs. PRAY

Last updated Aug 2, 2026

SAMT (Strategas Macro Thematic Opportunities ETF) and PRAY (FIS Biblically Responsible Risk Managed ETF) are both Large Cap Blend Equities funds. SAMT is actively managed, while PRAY is passively managed. Over the past 3 years, SAMT returned 23.90%/yr vs 13.31%/yr for PRAY. Their 0.74 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. SAMT charges 0.66%/yr vs 0.69%/yr for PRAY.

Performance

SAMT vs. PRAY - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Strategas Macro Thematic Opportunities ETF (SAMT) and FIS Biblically Responsible Risk Managed ETF (PRAY). 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 SAMT having a 12.63% return and PRAY slightly higher at 12.64%.

SAMT

• 1D: 0.47%
• 1M: -5.73%
• 6M: 8.34%
• YTD: 12.63%
• 1Y: 24.28%
• 3Y*: 23.90%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 14.23%

PRAY

• 1D: 0.80%
• 1M: 1.10%
• 6M: 8.04%
• YTD: 12.64%
• 1Y: 16.05%
• 3Y*: 13.31%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 8.74%

*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)
PRAY FIS Biblically Responsible Risk Managed ETF	$230.70K	$478.28K	$359.91K
SAMT Strategas Macro Thematic Opportunities ETF	$5.05M	$5.51M	$7.81M

SAMT vs. PRAY - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
SAMT Strategas Macro Thematic Opportunities ETF	12.63%	33.10%	28.15%	1.27%	-8.96%
PRAY FIS Biblically Responsible Risk Managed ETF	12.64%	9.08%	13.02%	20.02%	-12.71%

Correlation

The correlation between SAMT and PRAY is 0.67, which is moderate. They have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently, sharing some price drivers without tracking each other closely.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.67
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history.	0.70
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 8, 2022	0.74

The correlation between SAMT and PRAY has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.67 to 0.74 - a consistent structural relationship.

SAMT vs. PRAY - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	SAMT	PRAY
Industrials	21.8%	16.2%
Technology	20.4%	28.5%
Consumer Defensive	15.4%	3.4%
Healthcare	10.4%	7.0%
Consumer Cyclical	8.4%	13.1%
Communication Services	6.0%	7.7%
Financial Services	4.8%	12.5%
Basic Materials	4.2%	3.0%
Utilities	4.2%	3.8%
Real Estate	2.4%	1.5%
Energy	2.0%	3.2%

Return for Risk

SAMT vs. PRAY — Risk / Return Rank

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

SAMT

SAMT Risk / Return Rank: 55
SAMT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 53
SAMT Sortino Ratio Rank: 51
SAMT Omega Ratio Rank: 51
SAMT Calmar Ratio Rank: 67
SAMT Martin Ratio Rank: 52

PRAY

PRAY Risk / Return Rank: 48
PRAY Sharpe Ratio Rank: 45
PRAY Sortino Ratio Rank: 47
PRAY Omega Ratio Rank: 43
PRAY Calmar Ratio Rank: 50
PRAY Martin Ratio Rank: 57

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.

SAMT vs. PRAY - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Strategas Macro Thematic Opportunities ETF (SAMT) and FIS Biblically Responsible Risk Managed ETF (PRAY). 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.

	SAMT	PRAY	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.29	1.12	+0.17
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.82	1.71	+0.11
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.23	1.20	+0.03
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.33	1.80	+0.53
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	6.04	6.89	-0.85

SAMT vs. PRAY - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current SAMT Sharpe Ratio is 1.29, which is comparable to the PRAY Sharpe Ratio of 1.12. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of SAMT and PRAY, 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

SAMT vs. PRAY - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum SAMT drawdown since its inception was -20.57%, roughly equal to the maximum PRAY drawdown of -21.40%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for SAMT and PRAY.

Drawdown Indicators

	SAMT	PRAY	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-20.57%	-21.40%	+0.83%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-9.79%	-8.80%	-0.99%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-18.27%	-17.13%	-1.14%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-9.13%	-2.66%	-6.47%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-7.62%	-5.33%	-2.29%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.78%	2.30%	+1.48%

Volatility

SAMT vs. PRAY - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Strategas Macro Thematic Opportunities ETF (SAMT) is 3.43%, while FIS Biblically Responsible Risk Managed ETF (PRAY) has a volatility of 4.62%. This indicates that SAMT experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than PRAY based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	SAMT	PRAY	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.43%	4.62%	-1.19%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	14.23%	12.20%	+2.03%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	17.72%	14.20%	+3.52%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	17.11%	16.08%	+1.03%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	17.11%	16.08%	+1.03%

SAMT vs. PRAY - Expense Ratio Comparison

SAMT has a 0.66% expense ratio, which is lower than PRAY's 0.69% expense ratio.

Dividends

SAMT vs. PRAY - Dividend Comparison

SAMT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.62%, more than PRAY's 0.61% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022
PRAY FIS Biblically Responsible Risk Managed ETF	0.61%	0.69%	0.76%	0.83%	1.20%
SAMT Strategas Macro Thematic Opportunities ETF	0.62%	0.70%	1.40%	1.49%	0.73%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both SAMT and PRAY in my portfolio?

SAMT and PRAY 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.

Which is riskier, SAMT or PRAY?

PRAY has higher volatility (4.62%) compared to SAMT (3.43%). In terms of maximum drawdown, SAMT dropped -20.57% vs PRAY's -21.40%.

Which ETF is better, SAMT or PRAY?

On 3-year performance, SAMT leads with 23.90% vs 13.31% for PRAY. On fees, SAMT is cheaper at 0.66% per year. On volatility, SAMT has been the lower-risk option at 3.43%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, SAMT or PRAY?

Over the 3-year period, SAMT has performed better with a 23.90% return vs 13.31%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, SAMT or PRAY?

SAMT is cheaper with a 0.66% expense ratio, compared with 0.69% for PRAY.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, SAMT or PRAY?

SAMT and PRAY have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.62%.

What is the main difference between SAMT and PRAY?

They also come from different issuers: Strategas and Faith Investor Services. Their fees differ too: 0.66% for SAMT and 0.69% for PRAY.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

SAMT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.29 vs 1.12), 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.