BUL vs. VFMV

Last updated Aug 2, 2026

BUL (Pacer US Cash Cows Growth ETF) and VFMV (Vanguard U.S. Minimum Volatility ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - BUL is a Mid Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the Pacer US Cash Cows Growth Index, while VFMV is a Low Volatility fund actively managed by Vanguard. BUL is passively managed, while VFMV is actively managed. Over the past 5 years, BUL returned 10.18%/yr vs 9.39%/yr for VFMV. Their 0.73 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. BUL charges 0.60%/yr vs 0.13%/yr for VFMV.

Performance

BUL vs. VFMV - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Pacer US Cash Cows Growth ETF (BUL) and Vanguard U.S. Minimum Volatility ETF (VFMV). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both investments are quite close, with BUL having a 11.05% return and VFMV slightly higher at 11.10%.

BUL

• 1D: -0.32%
• 1M: 1.73%
• 6M: 9.52%
• YTD: 11.05%
• 1Y: 21.64%
• 3Y*: 19.41%
• 5Y*: 10.18%
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 14.03%

VFMV

• 1D: 0.45%
• 1M: 2.10%
• 6M: 7.34%
• YTD: 11.10%
• 1Y: 16.07%
• 3Y*: 14.38%
• 5Y*: 9.39%
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 10.08%

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
BUL Pacer US Cash Cows Growth ETF	$396.12K	$366.07K	$502.18K
VFMV Vanguard U.S. Minimum Volatility ETF	$1.77M	$2.11M	$2.29M

BUL vs. VFMV - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019
BUL Pacer US Cash Cows Growth ETF	11.05%	19.18%	27.39%	3.68%	-16.18%	32.48%	27.26%	4.81%
VFMV Vanguard U.S. Minimum Volatility ETF	11.10%	10.52%	16.91%	8.86%	-5.73%	20.75%	-0.19%	11.40%

Correlation

The correlation between BUL and VFMV is 0.70, which is moderate. They have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently, sharing some price drivers without tracking each other closely.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.70
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history.	0.68
Correlation (5Y) Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period.	0.72
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 3, 2019	0.73

The correlation between BUL and VFMV has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.68 to 0.73 - a consistent structural relationship.

BUL vs. VFMV - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	BUL	VFMV
Consumer Cyclical	28.2%	6.9%
Healthcare	27.8%	10.1%
Technology	21.9%	25.1%
Basic Materials	9.1%	-
Energy	5.5%	3.9%
Industrials	3.2%	10.1%
Consumer Defensive	2.6%	9.5%
Communication Services	1.5%	10.7%
Financial Services	-	10.6%
Real Estate	-	6.4%
Utilities	-	6.7%

Return for Risk

BUL vs. VFMV — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

BUL

BUL Risk / Return Rank: 57
BUL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 50
BUL Sortino Ratio Rank: 54
BUL Omega Ratio Rank: 48
BUL Calmar Ratio Rank: 67
BUL Martin Ratio Rank: 67

VFMV

VFMV Risk / Return Rank: 77
VFMV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 77
VFMV Sortino Ratio Rank: 79
VFMV Omega Ratio Rank: 75
VFMV Calmar Ratio Rank: 75
VFMV Martin Ratio Rank: 79

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

BUL vs. VFMV - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Pacer US Cash Cows Growth ETF (BUL) and Vanguard U.S. Minimum Volatility ETF (VFMV). 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.

Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.

	BUL	VFMV	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.23	1.76	-0.53
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.89	2.55	-0.67
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.22	1.31	-0.09
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.33	2.61	-0.29
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	8.20	10.07	-1.87

BUL vs. VFMV - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BUL Sharpe Ratio is 1.23, which is lower than the VFMV Sharpe Ratio of 1.76. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BUL and VFMV, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

BUL vs. VFMV - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BUL drawdown since its inception was -37.08%, which is greater than VFMV's maximum drawdown of -33.64%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BUL and VFMV.

Drawdown Indicators

	BUL	VFMV	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-37.08%	-33.64%	-3.44%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-8.93%	-6.00%	-2.93%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-23.55%	-10.35%	-13.20%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-27.85%	-15.41%	-12.44%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.32%	-1.16%	+0.84%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-7.52%	-3.59%	-3.93%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.53%	1.56%	+0.97%

Volatility

BUL vs. VFMV - Volatility Comparison

Pacer US Cash Cows Growth ETF (BUL) has a higher volatility of 4.26% compared to Vanguard U.S. Minimum Volatility ETF (VFMV) at 2.73%. This indicates that BUL's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than VFMV based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	BUL	VFMV	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.26%	2.73%	+1.53%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	12.94%	6.57%	+6.37%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	17.00%	8.96%	+8.04%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	21.90%	11.76%	+10.14%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	24.11%	14.16%	+9.95%

BUL vs. VFMV - Expense Ratio Comparison

BUL has a 0.60% expense ratio, which is higher than VFMV's 0.13% expense ratio.

Dividends

BUL vs. VFMV - Dividend Comparison

BUL's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.21%, less than VFMV's 1.74% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018
BUL Pacer US Cash Cows Growth ETF	0.21%	0.28%	0.30%	2.11%	0.67%	0.08%	0.69%	0.81%	0.00%
VFMV Vanguard U.S. Minimum Volatility ETF	1.74%	2.12%	1.46%	2.20%	2.08%	1.31%	2.14%	2.43%	2.29%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both BUL and VFMV in my portfolio?

BUL and VFMV have a correlation of 0.70, 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 VFMV?

BUL has higher volatility (4.26%) compared to VFMV (2.73%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BUL dropped -37.08% vs VFMV's -33.64%.

Which ETF is better, BUL or VFMV?

On 5-year performance, BUL leads with 10.18% vs 9.39% for VFMV. On fees, VFMV is cheaper at 0.13% per year. On volatility, VFMV has been the lower-risk option at 2.73%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, BUL or VFMV?

Over the 5-year period, BUL has performed better with a 10.18% return vs 9.39%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, BUL or VFMV?

VFMV is cheaper with a 0.13% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for BUL.

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

VFMV has the higher dividend yield at 1.74%, compared with 0.21% for BUL.

What is the main difference between BUL and VFMV?

BUL is categorized as Mid Cap Blend Equities, while VFMV is Low Volatility. They also come from different issuers: Pacer and Vanguard. Their fees differ too: 0.60% for BUL and 0.13% for VFMV.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

VFMV currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.76 vs 1.23), 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.