BVAL vs. GCOW

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

BVAL (Bluemonte Large Cap Value ETF) and GCOW (Pacer Global Cash Cows Dividend ETF) are both Large Cap Value Equities funds. Over the past year, BVAL returned 24.54% vs 21.14% for GCOW. A 0.55 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. BVAL charges 0.24%/yr vs 0.60%/yr for GCOW.

Performance

BVAL vs. GCOW - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Bluemonte Large Cap Value ETF (BVAL) and Pacer Global Cash Cows Dividend ETF (GCOW). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BVAL achieves a 11.82% return, which is significantly higher than GCOW's 7.34% return.

BVAL

• 1D: -0.78%
• 1M: 1.16%
• YTD: 11.82%
• 6M: 11.16%
• 1Y: 24.54%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

GCOW

• 1D: 0.00%
• 1M: -6.00%
• YTD: 7.34%
• 6M: 7.32%
• 1Y: 21.14%
• 3Y*: 15.59%
• 5Y*: 11.72%
• 10Y*: 9.95%

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

BVAL vs. GCOW - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
BVAL Bluemonte Large Cap Value ETF	11.82%	12.09%
GCOW Pacer Global Cash Cows Dividend ETF	7.34%	12.71%

Correlation

The correlation between BVAL and GCOW is 0.55, 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	0.55
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 23, 2025	0.55

The correlation between BVAL and GCOW has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.55 to 0.55 - a consistent structural relationship.

BVAL vs. GCOW - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	BVAL	GCOW
Technology	23.2%	1.3%
Financial Services	16.0%	-
Industrials	11.5%	12.6%
Healthcare	10.8%	14.8%
Consumer Cyclical	8.8%	4.8%
Consumer Defensive	7.8%	17.0%
Energy	6.3%	22.9%
Communication Services	5.2%	14.5%
Utilities	4.0%	4.0%
Real Estate	3.5%	-
Basic Materials	3.0%	8.1%

Return for Risk

BVAL vs. GCOW — Risk / Return Rank

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

BVAL

BVAL Risk / Return Rank: 81
BVAL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 82
BVAL Sortino Ratio Rank: 83
BVAL Omega Ratio Rank: 80
BVAL Calmar Ratio Rank: 78
BVAL Martin Ratio Rank: 83

GCOW

GCOW Risk / Return Rank: 60
GCOW Sharpe Ratio Rank: 60
GCOW Sortino Ratio Rank: 61
GCOW Omega Ratio Rank: 56
GCOW Calmar Ratio Rank: 64
GCOW Martin Ratio Rank: 61

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.

BVAL vs. GCOW - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Bluemonte Large Cap Value ETF (BVAL) and Pacer Global Cash Cows Dividend ETF (GCOW). 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.

	BVAL	GCOW	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.38	1.91	+0.46
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.32	2.74	+0.58
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.43	1.33	+0.10
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.68	3.06	+0.62
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	15.25	10.42	+4.83

BVAL vs. GCOW - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BVAL Sharpe Ratio is 2.38, which is comparable to the GCOW Sharpe Ratio of 1.91. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BVAL and GCOW, 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

BVAL vs. GCOW - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BVAL drawdown since its inception was -6.69%, smaller than the maximum GCOW drawdown of -37.64%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BVAL and GCOW.

Drawdown Indicators

	BVAL	GCOW	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-6.69%	-37.64%	+30.95%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-6.69%	-6.93%	+0.24%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-12.35%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-21.48%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-37.64%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.09%	-6.93%	+5.84%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.91%	-5.83%	+4.92%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.61%	2.03%	-0.42%

Volatility

BVAL vs. GCOW - Volatility Comparison

Bluemonte Large Cap Value ETF (BVAL) has a higher volatility of 3.51% compared to Pacer Global Cash Cows Dividend ETF (GCOW) at 2.89%. This indicates that BVAL's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than GCOW based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	BVAL	GCOW	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.51%	2.89%	+0.62%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	8.05%	8.29%	-0.24%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	10.38%	11.09%	-0.71%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	10.38%	13.50%	-3.12%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	10.38%	16.03%	-5.65%

BVAL vs. GCOW - Expense Ratio Comparison

BVAL has a 0.24% expense ratio, which is lower than GCOW's 0.60% expense ratio.

Dividends

BVAL vs. GCOW - Dividend Comparison

BVAL's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.97%, less than GCOW's 4.90% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016
BVAL Bluemonte Large Cap Value ETF	0.97%	0.73%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
GCOW Pacer Global Cash Cows Dividend ETF	4.90%	4.06%	5.14%	5.28%	4.39%	4.23%	4.12%	4.40%	3.94%	2.79%	1.95%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both BVAL and GCOW in my portfolio?

BVAL and GCOW have a correlation of 0.55, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, BVAL or GCOW?

BVAL has higher volatility (3.51%) compared to GCOW (2.89%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BVAL dropped -6.69% vs GCOW's -37.64%.

Which ETF is better, BVAL or GCOW?

On 1-year performance, BVAL leads with 24.54% vs 21.14% for GCOW. On fees, BVAL is cheaper at 0.24% per year. On volatility, GCOW has been the lower-risk option at 2.89%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, BVAL or GCOW?

Over the 1-year period, BVAL has performed better with a 24.54% return vs 21.14%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, BVAL or GCOW?

BVAL is cheaper with a 0.24% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for GCOW.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, BVAL or GCOW?

GCOW has the higher dividend yield at 4.90%, compared with 0.97% for BVAL.

What is the main difference between BVAL and GCOW?

They also come from different issuers: Bluemonte and Pacer. Their fees differ too: 0.24% for BVAL and 0.60% for GCOW.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

BVAL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.38 vs 1.91), 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.