Pacer Swan SOS ETF Key Technical Indicators
| PSCW ETF | USD 29.74 0.05 0.17% |
Momentum
OversoldOverbought
0 · Capitulated
As of the 10th of May, the last recorded price for Pacer Swan is 29.74 per share. Primary technical drivers reflect Downside Deviation of 0.1948, risk adjusted performance of 0.2781, and Standard Deviation of 0.2701. Quantitative analysis incorporates volatility metrics and price behavior to assess directional bias. Metrics are compared to industry averages to assess relative positioning.
For custom fund screens that go beyond Pacer Swan, explore the full Fund Screeners suite.Pacer Swan's One Year Return is the annualized return generated from holding a security for exactly 12 months. The measure is considered to be a good short-term indicator of fund performance. In other words, it represents the capital appreciation of fund investments over the last year. However when the market is volatile such as in recent years, One Year Return measure can be misleading.
One Year Return | = | (Mean of Monthly Returns - 1) | X | 100% |
Current Pacer Swan One Year Return | 16.90 % |
Reading One Year Return in context helps investors understand one aspect of Pacer Swan SOS's reported structure. A gap between market price and model-based measures may be informative, but it should be checked against NAV behavior and category-relative performance. A fund can look unusual on a single ratio without that alone signaling mispricing. Used carefully, this framework can improve fund research without treating Pacer Swan like an operating company.
| Competition |
Pacer Swan SOS Fund Metrics Relationships
Main Technical Indicators as of May 10, 2026
| Cycle Indicators | ||
| Math Operators | ||
| Math Transform | ||
| Momentum Indicators | ||
| Overlap Studies | ||
| Pattern Recognition | ||
| Price Transform | ||
| Statistic Functions | ||
| Volatility Indicators | ||
| Volume Indicators |
| Risk Adjusted Performance | 0.2781 | |||
| Market Risk Adjusted Performance | 4.33 | |||
| Mean Deviation | 0.2129 | |||
| Downside Deviation | 0.1948 | |||
| Coefficient Of Variation | 303.39 | |||
| Standard Deviation | 0.2701 | |||
| Variance | 0.073 | |||
| Information Ratio | 0.3754 | |||
| Jensen Alpha | 0.0795 | |||
| Total Risk Alpha | 0.0856 | |||
| Sortino Ratio | 0.5207 | |||
| Treynor Ratio | 4.32 | |||
| Maximum Drawdown | 1.32 | |||
| Value At Risk | -0.28 | |||
| Potential Upside | 0.476 | |||
| Downside Variance | 0.0379 | |||
| Semi Variance | -0.06 | |||
| Expected Short fall | -0.29 | |||
| Skewness | 0.7785 | |||
| Kurtosis | 1.51 |
Daily Market Strength Indicators
Market strength indicators for Pacer Swan quantify how the ETF responds to shifts in volume and sentiment. These indicators capture shifts in momentum that may precede significant price moves in Pacer Swan. The Market Facilitation Index measures how efficiently price moves relative to volume — rising MFI with rising volume signals strong trend participation. Monitoring these indicators for Pacer Swan through complete market cycles reveals recurring patterns.
Basic Forecasting Models
Bollinger Bands applied to Pacer Swan ETF price data measure how far Pacer Swan has deviated from its recent average relative to its own volatility. This distinction drives the choice of forecasting model applied to Pacer Swan's price data. On-balance volume for Pacer Swan ETF creates a running indicator of buying versus selling pressure in Pacer Swan. Price departures from the channel boundary often mean-revert, offering tactical signals for Pacer Swan's.Pacer Swan Comparable Funds
The related funds below provide a category-based comparison set for Pacer Swan's. This peer set gives investors a way to compare Pacer Swan's structure and outcomes against similar portfolio vehicles.
| Risk & Return | Correlation |
One Year Return Peer Comparison
Peer-based review of Pacer Swan on One Year Return helps benchmark the fund against similar portfolio vehicles. A gap in Pacer Swan's One Year Return versus similar funds may matter, but it should be cross-checked against NAV behavior and total-return trends. Tracking Pacer Swan's rank on One Year Return over time is most useful when paired with fund-specific metrics and category-relative returns. The resulting comparison is strongest when combined with category returns, volatility, and implementation-cost data.Pacer Swan is currently under evaluation for one year return relative to ETF peers.
Fund Metrics Relationships
Fund Asset Allocation for Pacer Swan
The fund invests 203.36% of asset under management in tradable equity instruments, with the rest of investments concentrated in .The way Pacer Swan's allocates its assets across investment categories directly influences its risk-return balance. Diversifying across asset classes in line with investor goals helps Pacer Swan's manage market volatility. The allocation across categories reflects Pacer Swan's investment mandate and prevailing market conditions. The allocation framework provides the structure needed to manage risk while pursuing return objectives.
Mutual funds build their portfolios through a combination of asset classes determined by their investment strategy. Fund managers make ongoing decisions about asset mix to align the portfolio with the fund's stated goals. Tracking allocation changes over time reveals how the fund manager responds to evolving market conditions. Asset allocation trends provide context for understanding the fund's recent performance and risk characteristics.
Important Fund Metrics
| Equity Positions Weight | 203.36 % | |||
| Three Year Return | 12.10 % | |||
| Net Asset | 15.61 M | |||
| Five Year Return | 7.10 % | |||
| One Year Return | 16.90 % |
Financial Metrics, Fundamentals & Methodology
The sustainability of Pacer Swan is grounded in exposure consistency and underlying market liquidity. Tracking difference can reflect fees, replication method, and securities lending policy.
Pacer Swan SOS data is compiled from fund disclosures and market reference feeds and standardized for comparability. Financial statement fields are presented under issuer-reported GAAP or IFRS accounting conventions.
Editorial review and methodology oversight provided by: Gabriel Shpitalnik, Member of Macroaxis Editorial Board