PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
AUSF vs. COWZ
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

AUSF vs. COWZ - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Global X Adaptive U.S. Factor ETF (AUSF) and Pacer US Cash Cows 100 ETF (COWZ). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, AUSF achieves a 6.72% return, which is significantly lower than COWZ's 8.18% return.


AUSF

1D
-0.43%
1M
0.23%
YTD
6.72%
6M
7.67%
1Y
15.11%
3Y*
20.14%
5Y*
12.71%
10Y*

COWZ

1D
-0.34%
1M
2.61%
YTD
8.18%
6M
9.03%
1Y
22.23%
3Y*
14.44%
5Y*
10.57%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

AUSF vs. COWZ - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024202320222021202020192018
AUSF
Global X Adaptive U.S. Factor ETF
6.72%13.69%16.05%22.26%-0.18%27.48%1.27%24.06%-10.79%
COWZ
Pacer US Cash Cows 100 ETF
8.18%8.98%10.64%14.73%0.19%42.57%11.65%23.41%-16.71%

Correlation

The correlation between AUSF and COWZ is 0.79, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.79

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.81

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.82

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 29, 2018

0.85

The correlation between AUSF and COWZ has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.79 to 0.85 - a consistent structural relationship.

AUSF vs. COWZ - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
AUSF
COWZ

Financial Services

18.7%

-

Technology

13.5%
16.0%

Healthcare

12.0%
21.8%

Industrials

11.7%
8.4%

Communication Services

10.6%
10.4%

Consumer Defensive

8.5%
10.9%

Consumer Cyclical

7.8%
11.7%

Energy

5.2%
16.9%

Real Estate

4.1%

-

Utilities

4.0%

-

Basic Materials

4.0%
3.7%

Financial Services

AUSF
18.7%
COWZ

-

Technology

AUSF
13.5%
COWZ
16.0%

Healthcare

AUSF
12.0%
COWZ
21.8%

Industrials

AUSF
11.7%
COWZ
8.4%

Communication Services

AUSF
10.6%
COWZ
10.4%

Consumer Defensive

AUSF
8.5%
COWZ
10.9%

Consumer Cyclical

AUSF
7.8%
COWZ
11.7%

Energy

AUSF
5.2%
COWZ
16.9%

Real Estate

AUSF
4.1%
COWZ

-

Utilities

AUSF
4.0%
COWZ

-

Basic Materials

AUSF
4.0%
COWZ
3.7%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.


Return for Risk

AUSF vs. COWZ — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

AUSF
AUSF Risk / Return Rank: 4444
Overall Rank
AUSF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4242
Sharpe Ratio Rank
AUSF Sortino Ratio Rank: 4343
Sortino Ratio Rank
AUSF Omega Ratio Rank: 3939
Omega Ratio Rank
AUSF Calmar Ratio Rank: 5252
Calmar Ratio Rank
AUSF Martin Ratio Rank: 4545
Martin Ratio Rank

COWZ
COWZ Risk / Return Rank: 6565
Overall Rank
COWZ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5959
Sharpe Ratio Rank
COWZ Sortino Ratio Rank: 6262
Sortino Ratio Rank
COWZ Omega Ratio Rank: 5757
Omega Ratio Rank
COWZ Calmar Ratio Rank: 8383
Calmar Ratio Rank
COWZ Martin Ratio Rank: 6565
Martin Ratio Rank
The rank (0–100) shows how this investment's returns compare to the risk taken. Higher = better. Based on the past 12 months of data, combining Sharpe, Sortino, and other metrics used by quantitative funds and institutional investors.

AUSF vs. COWZ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Global X Adaptive U.S. Factor ETF (AUSF) and Pacer US Cash Cows 100 ETF (COWZ). 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.


AUSFCOWZDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.51

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.80

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.26

1.36

-0.10

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.60

4.46

-1.87

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

7.54

12.19

-4.65

AUSF vs. COWZ - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current AUSF Sharpe Ratio is 1.50, which is comparable to the COWZ Sharpe Ratio of 2.02. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of AUSF and COWZ, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


AUSFCOWZDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.50

2.02

-0.51

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.94

0.60

+0.33

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.65

0.65

0.00

Drawdowns

AUSF vs. COWZ - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum AUSF drawdown since its inception was -44.25%, which is greater than COWZ's maximum drawdown of -38.63%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for AUSF and COWZ.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


AUSFCOWZDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-44.25%

-38.63%

-5.62%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-5.84%

-5.00%

-0.84%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-12.29%

-22.00%

+9.71%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-14.23%

-22.00%

+7.77%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-2.26%

-0.91%

-1.35%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-4.22%

-4.81%

+0.59%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.01%

1.83%

+0.18%

Volatility

AUSF vs. COWZ - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Global X Adaptive U.S. Factor ETF (AUSF) is 2.41%, while Pacer US Cash Cows 100 ETF (COWZ) has a volatility of 2.56%. This indicates that AUSF experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than COWZ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


AUSFCOWZDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

2.41%

2.56%

-0.15%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

6.65%

7.12%

-0.47%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

10.14%

11.13%

-0.99%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

13.65%

17.63%

-3.98%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

19.07%

19.93%

-0.86%

AUSF vs. COWZ - Expense Ratio Comparison

AUSF has a 0.27% expense ratio, which is lower than COWZ's 0.49% expense ratio.


Dividends

AUSF vs. COWZ - Dividend Comparison

AUSF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.76%, more than COWZ's 1.99% yield.


PositionTTM2025202420232022202120202019201820172016
AUSF
Global X Adaptive U.S. Factor ETF
2.76%2.78%2.63%1.83%2.51%2.22%2.95%4.02%1.46%0.00%0.00%
COWZ
Pacer US Cash Cows 100 ETF
1.99%2.19%1.82%1.92%1.96%1.48%2.54%1.96%1.67%1.95%0.13%

Frequently Asked Questions


AUSF and COWZ have a correlation of 0.79, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

COWZ has higher volatility (2.56%) compared to AUSF (2.41%). In terms of maximum drawdown, AUSF dropped -44.25% vs COWZ's -38.63%.

On 5-year performance, AUSF leads with 12.71% vs 10.57% for COWZ. On fees, AUSF is cheaper at 0.27% per year. On volatility, AUSF has been the lower-risk option at 2.41%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 5-year period, AUSF has performed better with a 12.71% return vs 10.57%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

AUSF is cheaper with a 0.27% expense ratio, compared with 0.49% for COWZ.

AUSF has the higher dividend yield at 2.76%, compared with 1.99% for COWZ.

AUSF tracks Adaptive Wealth Strategies U.S. Factor Index, while COWZ tracks Pacer US Cash Cows 100 Index. They also come from different issuers: Global X and Pacer. Their fees differ too: 0.27% for AUSF and 0.49% for COWZ.

COWZ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.02 vs 1.50), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for AUSF and COWZ

Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.

Open Portfolio Optimizer