Skip to content

AUGW vs PSFD

AllianzIM U.S. Equity Buffer20 Aug ETF

AUGWCCboe

Pacer Swan SOS Flex (January) ETF

PSFDBCboe

Overlap

Expense ratio

PSFD −0.25pt a year

AUGW0.74%PSFD0.49%

Avg volume · 30D

AUGW 21.8×the volume

AUGW19.8KPSFD905

3Y return · a year

PSFD +3.3pt

AUGW+13.0%PSFD+16.3%

AUGW vs PSFD Performance

Oct 31, 2025 – Oct 30, 2026

+8.0%AUGW+11.4%PSFD

Oct 31, 2025 to Oct 30, 2026. AUGW +8.0%. PSFD +11.4%. Use the arrow keys to read each point.−2.5%0%2.5%5%Oct 2025Apr 2026Oct 2026
Expense ratio
AUGW 0.74%
PSFD 0.49%, better
Fund size
AUGW $128M
PSFD $60M
1Y total return
AUGW +8.0%
PSFD +11.4%, better
Holdings
AUGW 2
PSFD 4
Avg volume (30D)
AUGW 19.8K sh, better
PSFD 905 sh
NAV per share
AUGW $34.97
PSFD $40.88
52W range

ETF.net Grade

AUGW: Cost 37, Risk 57, Mission 100, Tradability 48, Holdings 61, Durability 41. PSFD: Cost 85, Risk 30, Mission not scored, Tradability 45, Holdings not scored, Durability 69.
Pillar letters and Scores for AUGW, PSFD, with each pillar’s weight
PillarAUGWPSFD
Cost30% weightD37A85Higher
Mission25% weightA100Not scored
Risk15% weightB57HigherD30
Tradability15% weightC48HigherC45
Holdings10% weightB61Not scored
Durability5% weightC41B69Higher

Rank among S&P 500 Buffer 20% funds

Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.

Same Category. AUGW and PSFD are both graded against the same 24 S&P 500 Buffer 20% funds, so their Grades compare head to head.

S&P 500 Buffer 20%⁠

Category · 24 funds
See all 24 ›

PSFD ranks 2nd and AUGW 17th of 24 funds in the S&P 500 Buffer 20% Category.

  1. Rank 1BBALTInnovator Defined Wealth Shield ETFScore 66
  2. Rank 2BPSFDPacer Swan SOS Flex (January) ETFScore 61
  3. Rank 2BPSFJPacer Swan SOS Flex (July) ETFScore 61
  4. Rank 15CNVBWAllianzIM U.S. Equity Buffer20 Nov ETFScore 47
  5. Rank 17CAUGWAllianzIM U.S. Equity Buffer20 Aug ETFScore 46
  6. Rank 18CFEBWAllianzIM U.S. Equity Buffer20 Feb ETFScore 44

Our read on each fund

ETF.net Research

AUGWCAllianzIM U.S. Equity Buffer20 Aug ETF

PSFDBPacer Swan SOS Flex (January) ETF

In short

AUGW AUGW is the August rung of a twelve-fund ladder: a year of S&P 500 exposure up to a cap, with the first 20% of losses absorbed. Built by the in-house hedging desk behind Allianz Life's annuities, priced at the going rate for deep buffers.

PSFD Absorbs the first 20% of a drop in the SPDR S&P 500 ETF Trust over each 12-month period, with your upside capped in exchange. One of the original 2020 Pacer/Swan buffer funds, and priced under most deep-buffer rivals.

Stated mandate

AUGW The fund seeks to match the returns of the SPDR® S&P 500® ETF Trust over an outcome period, subject to an upside cap, while buffering the first 20% of losses.

PSFD The fund seeks to match the returns of the SPDR S&P 500 ETF Trust up to a stated cap while mitigating specified downside losses through a structured buffer strategy over an approximately one-year period.

Why people hold it

  • AUGW Deep end of the shelf: the first 20% of SPDR S&P 500 ETF Trust losses over the one-year period are absorbed before fees, double the 10% tier AllianzIM sells alongside it.allianzim.com
  • The hedging is in-house. AllianzIM is Allianz Life's own investment arm and runs these funds on the proprietary platform its affiliates use for hedged assets.allianzlife.com
  • Resets each August 1 with a fresh 20% buffer and a newly struck cap, and it has monthly siblings across the calendar, so entry dates can be spread out.allianzim.com
  • Plumbing is straightforward: FLEX options written on SPY itself, and the payoff has matched the buffer-and-cap shape its own documents describe.allianzim.com
  • PSFD 0.49% a year versus a 0.74% median for 20%-buffer S&P 500 funds, undercutting the AllianzIM month-series lineup (JANW, APRW, JUNW). When upside is capped, fees come straight out of the ceiling.
  • Deep cushion, clean reset: FLEX options are structured to absorb the first 20% of underlying losses over the roughly one-year period, with a new cap struck at the start of each period.paceretfs.com
  • Siblings run the same recipe on other calendars (PSFM in April, PSFJ in July), so start dates can be staggered instead of pinned to one January strike. Standing sits in the upper half of the deep-buffer group.

Worth knowing

  • AUGW At 0.74% the fee sits right at the deep-buffer median, and cheaper 20% buffer options exist: PSFJ and PSFM at 0.49%, PBFR at 0.50%.
  • Thinly traded next to the category's giants, so the bid-ask spread you cross is part of what the protection costs.
  • Upside stops at the cap and the buffer is measured from the August 1 start, so mid-period buyers work with different math than the headline terms.allianzim.com
  • PSFD Thinly traded. Spreads can be wider and larger orders harder to fill than in the giants of the buffer aisle.
  • No income stream: the fund holds options on an S&P 500 tracker rather than the stocks, and it has not paid a distribution.paceretfs.com
  • Buffer and cap run start to finish of the period and are set before fees and expenses. Shares bought mid-period carry different remaining cushion and headroom.paceretfs.com

Full AUGW profile⁠

Full PSFD profile⁠

AUGW vs PSFD Holdings

As of
How we measure overlap

Each holding counts at its smaller weight in the two funds, summed over the full Holdings. Sector, country and asset class use the same rule on each fund’s split. Cash, FX and derivative lines stay out of the counts. Two bond funds get no overlap figure.

AUGW vs PSFD Cost

Overpaying AUGW vs PSFD

$4,515

On $10,000 over 30 years. 7% growth a year before fees, expense ratio only.

  • AUGW 0.74%

    $14,307

  • PSFD 0.49%

    $9,792

$10,000
30 years

Cost over time

  • AUGW 0.74%
  • PSFD 0.49%
  • Overpaying
One line per fund, from year 0 to year 30. Use the arrow keys to read each point.$0$5K$10K$15K051015202530AUGW $14,307PSFD $9,792

Year by year

YearAUGWPSFDOverpaying
10$1,319$883$436
20$5,015$3,394$1,621
30$14,307$9,792$4,515

Expense ratio

  • 0.74%AUGW
  • 0.49%PSFD, cheaper
  • Middle half of S&P 500 Buffer 20% funds
  • Median 0.74%

PSFD cheapest of 24 funds

AUGW 10th cheapest of 24 funds

AUGW vs PSFD Dividends

Last 12 months to Oct 30, 2026
Payout (12M)
AUGW None
PSFD None

Distribution history

AUGWAll AUGW payments⁠

No distribution history available.

PSFDAll PSFD payments⁠

No distribution history available.

AUGW vs PSFD Risk

Fall from peak · 5 years

This chart needs five years of history for both funds.

Risk facts

VolatilityStd dev, 3 years
AUGW 5.2%, betterPSFD 7.4%
Return per unit of riskSharpe ratio, 3 years
AUGW 1.55, betterPSFD 1.50
Worst fallMax drawdown, 5 years
AUGW −8.8%since Aug 2023PSFD −14.9%
Market sensitivityBeta, 5 years
AUGW 0.41PSFD 0.56

Popular comparisons

  • AUGWCvsBALTB

    AllianzIM U.S. Equity Buffer20 Aug ETF · Innovator Defined Wealth Shield ETF

    Expense ratio
    0.74% · 0.69%
    Category
    Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
  • PSFDBvsBALTB

    Pacer Swan SOS Flex (January) ETF · Innovator Defined Wealth Shield ETF

    Expense ratio
    0.49% · 0.69%
    Category
    Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
  • AUGWCvsPSFJB

    AllianzIM U.S. Equity Buffer20 Aug ETF · Pacer Swan SOS Flex (July) ETF

    Expense ratio
    0.74% · 0.49%
    Category
    Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
  • PSFDBvsPSFJB

    Pacer Swan SOS Flex (January) ETF · Pacer Swan SOS Flex (July) ETF

    Expense ratio
    0.49% · 0.49%
    Category
    Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
  • AUGWCvsPSFOB

    AllianzIM U.S. Equity Buffer20 Aug ETF · Pacer Swan SOS Flex (October) ETF

    Expense ratio
    0.74% · 0.49%
    Category
    Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
  • PSFDBvsPSFOB

    Pacer Swan SOS Flex (January) ETF · Pacer Swan SOS Flex (October) ETF

    Expense ratio
    0.49% · 0.49%
    Category
    Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.