DAUG vs PSMJ
FT Vest US Equity Deep Buffer ETF - August vs Pacer Swan SOS Moderate July ETF
Which is better, DAUG or PSMJ?
PSMJ has been ahead.
PSMJ has a lower expense ratio. PSMJ led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.94.
MarketXLS is not an investment adviser. This comparison is generated automatically from market data and is for information only. A Best mark means the better reading on that one measure, not a recommendation to buy.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | DAUG | PSMJ |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.85% | 0.49%Best |
| AUM | $446M | $108M |
| Dividend Yield | 0.00% | 0.00% |
| Holdings | 10 | 12 |
| YTD Return | +7.66%Best | +7.57% |
| 1Y Return | +9.87% | +10.19%Best |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +12.57% | +13.78%Best |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +6.73% | +10.75%Best |
| Volatility (annualized) | 7.8%Tie | 7.8%Tie |
| Max Drawdown | -15.3% | -10.9%Best |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $13,849 | $16,662Best |
| Fund Family | First Trust Portfolios (US) | Pacer ETFs |
| Category | Alternative | Alternative |
| Style | Multi Alternative | Multi Alternative |
| Inception | Nov 6, 2019 | Jun 30, 2021 |
Not shown on this pair: Top 10 Weight.
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Jul 1, 2021 to Oct 14, 2026 (5.3 years).
DAUG vs PSMJ growth
Month-end closes. Both lines start at 0% in the first month shown, so the gap between them is the difference in growth across that window. The full view covers the 5.3 years both funds cover.
DAUG vs PSMJ Performance
FT Vest US Equity Deep Buffer ETF - August (DAUG) is an ETF from First Trust Portfolios (US) and Pacer Swan SOS Moderate July ETF (PSMJ) is an ETF from Pacer ETFs. Over the past year DAUG returned +9.87% while PSMJ returned +10.19%. Year to date, DAUG is up 7.66% versus a gain of 7.57% for PSMJ.
Over three years, DAUG compounded at +12.57% per year against +13.78% for PSMJ; over five years the annualized figures are +6.73% and +10.75% respectively.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
DAUG and PSMJ have been equally volatile, both at 7.8% annualized.
The deepest peak-to-trough decline in our data was -15.3% for DAUG and -10.9% for PSMJ. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.94. They move almost in lockstep, so holding both mostly duplicates the same exposure.
Fees and Cost Over Time
DAUG charges 0.85% per year while PSMJ charges 0.49%. On a $10,000 position that is $85 vs $49 annually, a gap of $36 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, DAUG currently yields 0.00% against 0.00% for PSMJ.
You are not choosing between two funds in isolation.
Whichever of DAUG and PSMJ you pick has to sit alongside everything else you own. Add the rest and see what the combination actually holds.
Free for up to 10 holdings. No account needed.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, DAUG or PSMJ?
DAUG has an expense ratio of 0.85% while PSMJ charges 0.49%. PSMJ is the cheaper option, by $36 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, DAUG or PSMJ?
Over the past year DAUG returned +9.87% vs +10.19% for PSMJ, so PSMJ leads on 1-year performance. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, DAUG or PSMJ?
DAUG and PSMJ have been equally volatile, both at 7.8% annualized. Worst drawdown: DAUG -15.3% vs PSMJ -10.9%.
Should I hold both DAUG and PSMJ?
DAUG and PSMJ have a monthly-return correlation of 0.94, so they move almost identically. What is left to separate them is the fee and the index each one tracks. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which pays a higher dividend, DAUG or PSMJ?
DAUG yields 0.00% while PSMJ yields 0.00%, so PSMJ currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is PSMJ better than DAUG?
PSMJ has a lower expense ratio. PSMJ led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.94. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.