GMAY vs PSCW

GMAY vs PSCW

Which is better, GMAY or PSCW?

Each has led over a different period.

PSCW has a lower expense ratio. GMAY led over 3Y and the full window, PSCW over 1Y.

Lower Fees: PSCWHigher Returns: split

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

MetricGMAYPSCW
Expense Ratio0.85%0.49%Best
AUM$448M$62M
Dividend Yield0.00%0.00%
Holdings1012
YTD Return+6.79%+10.26%Best
1Y Return+9.14%+12.60%Best
3Y Return (annualized)+12.19%Best+11.95%
5Y Return (annualized)-+7.34%
Volatility (annualized)6.0%Best6.5%
Max Drawdown-11.8%Best-11.9%
$10,000 over 3.4 years$14,598Best$14,483
Fund FamilyFirst Trust Portfolios (US)Pacer ETFs
CategoryAlternativeAlternative
StyleMulti AlternativeMulti Alternative
InceptionMay 19, 2023Mar 31, 2021

Not shown on this pair: Top 10 Weight.

Volatility and max drawdown, and the $10,000 over 3.4 years row, are measured over the window both funds cover: May 22, 2023 to Oct 14, 2026 (3.4 years).

GMAY vs PSCW 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 3.4 years both funds cover.

Compare GMAY against instead:GMAY vs SPYGMAY vs QQQGMAY vs VOOGMAY vs VTIPSCW against:PSCW vs VXUS

GMAY vs PSCW Performance

FT Vest US Equity Moderate Buffer ETF - May (GMAY) is an ETF from First Trust Portfolios (US) and Pacer Swan SOS Conservative (April) ETF (PSCW) is an ETF from Pacer ETFs. Over the past year GMAY returned +9.14% while PSCW returned +12.60%. Year to date, GMAY is up 6.79% versus a gain of 10.26% for PSCW.

Over three years, GMAY compounded at +12.19% per year against +11.95% for PSCW.

Past performance does not guarantee future results.

Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns

PSCW has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 6.5% compared with 6.0% for GMAY. Lower volatility generally means a smoother ride, though it often comes with lower long-run returns.

The deepest peak-to-trough decline in our data was -11.8% for GMAY and -11.9% for PSCW. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.

The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.85. They usually move together, but the gap leaves some room for diversification.

Fees and Cost Over Time

GMAY charges 0.85% per year while PSCW 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, GMAY currently yields 0.00% against 0.00% for PSCW.

You are not choosing between two funds in isolation.

Whichever of GMAY and PSCW you pick has to sit alongside everything else you own. Add the rest and see what the combination actually holds.

GMAYPSCW

Free for up to 10 holdings. No account needed.

Frequently Asked Questions

Which is cheaper, GMAY or PSCW?

GMAY has an expense ratio of 0.85% while PSCW charges 0.49%. PSCW is the cheaper option, by $36 a year on a $10,000 investment.

Which performed better, GMAY or PSCW?

Over the past year GMAY returned +9.14% vs +12.60% for PSCW, so PSCW leads on 1-year performance. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.

Which is riskier, GMAY or PSCW?

PSCW has been the more volatile fund at 6.5% annualized versus 6.0% for GMAY. Worst drawdown: GMAY -11.8% vs PSCW -11.9%.

Should I hold both GMAY and PSCW?

GMAY and PSCW have a monthly-return correlation of 0.85, so their returns are far enough apart for the mix to behave differently from either one alone. This is information, not a recommendation.

Which pays a higher dividend, GMAY or PSCW?

GMAY yields 0.00% while PSCW yields 0.00%, so PSCW currently pays the higher dividend yield.

Is PSCW better than GMAY?

PSCW has a lower expense ratio. GMAY led over 3Y and the full window, PSCW over 1Y. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.