BUL vs. QDPL

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

BUL (Pacer US Cash Cows Growth ETF) and QDPL (Pacer Metaurus US Large Cap Dividend Multiplier 400 ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - BUL is a Mid Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the Pacer US Cash Cows Growth Index, while QDPL is a Large Cap Blend Equities fund actively managed by Pacer. BUL is passively managed, while QDPL is actively managed. Over the past 3 years, BUL returned 22.33%/yr vs 20.64%/yr for QDPL. A 0.78 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. Both charge a 0.60% expense ratio.

Performance

BUL vs. QDPL - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Pacer US Cash Cows Growth ETF (BUL) and Pacer Metaurus US Large Cap Dividend Multiplier 400 ETF (QDPL). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BUL achieves a 9.02% return, which is significantly lower than QDPL's 10.40% return.

BUL

• 1D: 0.04%
• 1M: 5.95%
• YTD: 9.02%
• 6M: 10.73%
• 1Y: 25.79%
• 3Y*: 22.33%
• 5Y*: 11.26%
• 10Y*: —

QDPL

• 1D: -0.65%
• 1M: 5.23%
• YTD: 10.40%
• 6M: 10.54%
• 1Y: 26.37%
• 3Y*: 20.64%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

BUL vs. QDPL - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
BUL Pacer US Cash Cows Growth ETF	9.02%	19.18%	27.39%	3.68%	-16.18%	13.50%
QDPL Pacer Metaurus US Large Cap Dividend Multiplier 400 ETF	10.40%	16.52%	22.83%	23.66%	-16.25%	8.32%

Correlation

The correlation between BUL and QDPL is 0.72, 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	0.72
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.72
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 14, 2021	0.78

The correlation between BUL and QDPL has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.72 to 0.78 - a consistent structural relationship.

BUL vs. QDPL - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	BUL	QDPL
Technology	28.3%	27.6%
Consumer Cyclical	22.3%	8.4%
Healthcare	21.4%	7.6%
Industrials	13.4%	6.3%
Basic Materials	5.7%	1.4%
Energy	5.1%	2.4%
Consumer Defensive	2.3%	4.0%
Communication Services	1.6%	8.5%
Financial Services	-	10.3%
Real Estate	-	1.5%
Utilities	-	2.1%

Return for Risk

BUL vs. QDPL — Risk / Return Rank

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

BUL

BUL Risk / Return Rank: 50
BUL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 44
BUL Sortino Ratio Rank: 46
BUL Omega Ratio Rank: 42
BUL Calmar Ratio Rank: 58
BUL Martin Ratio Rank: 59

QDPL

QDPL Risk / Return Rank: 67
QDPL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 66
QDPL Sortino Ratio Rank: 66
QDPL Omega Ratio Rank: 66
QDPL Calmar Ratio Rank: 61
QDPL Martin Ratio Rank: 75

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.

BUL vs. QDPL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Pacer US Cash Cows Growth ETF (BUL) and Pacer Metaurus US Large Cap Dividend Multiplier 400 ETF (QDPL). 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.

	BUL	QDPL	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.55	2.23	-0.68
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.30	3.11	-0.80
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.27	1.41	-0.13
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.90	3.06	-0.16
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	10.49	14.37	-3.89
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

BUL vs. QDPL - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BUL Sharpe Ratio is 1.55, which is lower than the QDPL Sharpe Ratio of 2.23. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BUL and QDPL, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	BUL	QDPL	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.55	2.23	-0.68
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.52	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.58	0.83	-0.25

Drawdowns

BUL vs. QDPL - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BUL drawdown since its inception was -37.08%, which is greater than QDPL's maximum drawdown of -22.59%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BUL and QDPL.

Drawdown Indicators

	BUL	QDPL	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-37.08%	-22.59%	-14.49%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-8.93%	-8.65%	-0.28%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-23.55%	-17.75%	-5.80%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-27.85%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	-0.65%	+0.65%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-7.65%	-5.14%	-2.51%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.46%	1.84%	+0.62%

Volatility

BUL vs. QDPL - Volatility Comparison

Pacer US Cash Cows Growth ETF (BUL) has a higher volatility of 5.32% compared to Pacer Metaurus US Large Cap Dividend Multiplier 400 ETF (QDPL) at 2.69%. This indicates that BUL's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than QDPL based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	BUL	QDPL	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.32%	2.69%	+2.63%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	11.88%	9.00%	+2.88%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	16.78%	11.89%	+4.89%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	21.79%	15.01%	+6.78%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	24.25%	15.01%	+9.24%

BUL vs. QDPL - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both BUL and QDPL have an expense ratio of 0.60%.

Dividends

BUL vs. QDPL - Dividend Comparison

BUL's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.23%, less than QDPL's 5.05% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019
BUL Pacer US Cash Cows Growth ETF	0.23%	0.28%	0.30%	2.11%	0.67%	0.08%	0.69%	0.81%
QDPL Pacer Metaurus US Large Cap Dividend Multiplier 400 ETF	5.05%	4.84%	5.43%	6.30%	7.27%	2.44%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both BUL and QDPL in my portfolio?

BUL and QDPL have a correlation of 0.72, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, BUL or QDPL?

BUL has higher volatility (5.32%) compared to QDPL (2.69%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BUL dropped -37.08% vs QDPL's -22.59%.

Which ETF is better, BUL or QDPL?

On 3-year performance, BUL leads with 22.33% vs 20.64% for QDPL. Both ETFs have the same 0.60% expense ratio. On volatility, QDPL has been the lower-risk option at 2.69%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, BUL or QDPL?

Over the 3-year period, BUL has performed better with a 22.33% return vs 20.64%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, BUL or QDPL?

BUL and QDPL have the same expense ratio: 0.60% per year.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, BUL or QDPL?

QDPL has the higher dividend yield at 5.05%, compared with 0.23% for BUL.

What is the main difference between BUL and QDPL?

BUL is categorized as Mid Cap Blend Equities, while QDPL is Large Cap Blend Equities.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

QDPL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.23 vs 1.55), 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.