CAFG vs. FLQS

Last updated Jul 17, 2026

CAFG (Pacer US Small Cap Cash Cows Growth Leaders ETF) and FLQS (Franklin LibertyQ U.S. Small Cap Equity ETF) are both Small Cap Growth Equities funds - CAFG tracks the Pacer US Small Cap Cash Cows Growth Leaders Index - Benchmark TR Gross while FLQS tracks the LibertyQ U.S. Small Cap Equity Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, CAFG returned 13.70%/yr vs 12.91%/yr for FLQS. Their correlation of 0.89 suggests significant overlap in exposure. CAFG charges 0.59%/yr vs 0.35%/yr for FLQS.

Performance

CAFG vs. FLQS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Pacer US Small Cap Cash Cows Growth Leaders ETF (CAFG) and Franklin LibertyQ U.S. Small Cap Equity ETF (FLQS). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CAFG achieves a 31.29% return, which is significantly higher than FLQS's 16.50% return.

CAFG

• 1D: -0.04%
• 1M: 2.88%
• 6M: 22.57%
• YTD: 31.29%
• 1Y: 38.12%
• 3Y*: 13.70%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

FLQS

• 1D: 1.52%
• 1M: 6.25%
• 6M: 11.33%
• YTD: 16.50%
• 1Y: 23.11%
• 3Y*: 12.91%
• 5Y*: 7.79%
• 10Y*: —

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

CAFG vs. FLQS - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
CAFG Pacer US Small Cap Cash Cows Growth Leaders ETF	31.29%	0.17%	6.95%	21.26%
FLQS Franklin LibertyQ U.S. Small Cap Equity ETF	16.50%	5.04%	8.34%	17.05%

Correlation

The correlation between CAFG and FLQS is 0.84, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.84
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.89
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 2, 2023	0.89

The correlation between CAFG and FLQS has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.84 to 0.89 - a consistent structural relationship.

CAFG vs. FLQS - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	CAFG	FLQS
Technology	34.1%	18.2%
Healthcare	18.7%	9.9%
Industrials	18.3%	16.0%
Energy	12.2%	4.2%
Consumer Cyclical	6.8%	15.0%
Communication Services	3.5%	1.8%
Consumer Defensive	2.9%	7.8%
Basic Materials	2.1%	2.1%
Utilities	1.4%	5.7%
Financial Services	-	12.7%
Real Estate	-	6.7%

Return for Risk

CAFG vs. FLQS — Risk / Return Rank

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

CAFG

CAFG Risk / Return Rank: 86
CAFG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 85
CAFG Sortino Ratio Rank: 85
CAFG Omega Ratio Rank: 79
CAFG Calmar Ratio Rank: 92
CAFG Martin Ratio Rank: 89

FLQS

FLQS Risk / Return Rank: 59
FLQS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 57
FLQS Sortino Ratio Rank: 63
FLQS Omega Ratio Rank: 55
FLQS Calmar Ratio Rank: 65
FLQS Martin Ratio Rank: 56

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.

CAFG vs. FLQS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Pacer US Small Cap Cash Cows Growth Leaders ETF (CAFG) and Franklin LibertyQ U.S. Small Cap Equity ETF (FLQS). 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.

	CAFG	FLQS	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.19	1.54	+0.65
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.08	2.35	+0.73
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.37	1.28	+0.09
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.71	2.58	+2.13
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	15.67	7.71	+7.96

CAFG vs. FLQS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CAFG Sharpe Ratio is 2.19, which is higher than the FLQS Sharpe Ratio of 1.54. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CAFG and FLQS, 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

CAFG vs. FLQS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CAFG drawdown since its inception was -23.66%, smaller than the maximum FLQS drawdown of -42.16%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CAFG and FLQS.

Drawdown Indicators

	CAFG	FLQS	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-23.66%	-42.16%	+18.50%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-8.13%	-9.00%	+0.87%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-23.66%	-23.12%	-0.54%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-28.05%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.07%	0.00%	-2.07%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-5.36%	-7.92%	+2.56%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.44%	3.01%	-0.57%

Volatility

CAFG vs. FLQS - Volatility Comparison

Pacer US Small Cap Cash Cows Growth Leaders ETF (CAFG) and Franklin LibertyQ U.S. Small Cap Equity ETF (FLQS) have volatilities of 3.28% and 3.40%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	CAFG	FLQS	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.28%	3.40%	-0.12%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	12.94%	10.52%	+2.42%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	17.52%	15.08%	+2.44%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	19.41%	19.20%	+0.21%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	19.41%	21.59%	-2.18%

CAFG vs. FLQS - Expense Ratio Comparison

CAFG has a 0.59% expense ratio, which is higher than FLQS's 0.35% expense ratio.

Dividends

CAFG vs. FLQS - Dividend Comparison

CAFG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.30%, less than FLQS's 1.31% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
CAFG Pacer US Small Cap Cash Cows Growth Leaders ETF	0.30%	0.35%	0.36%	0.39%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
FLQS Franklin LibertyQ U.S. Small Cap Equity ETF	1.31%	1.16%	1.29%	1.75%	1.40%	0.95%	1.20%	1.41%	1.27%	1.02%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CAFG and FLQS in my portfolio?

CAFG and FLQS have a correlation of 0.84, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, CAFG or FLQS?

FLQS has higher volatility (3.40%) compared to CAFG (3.28%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CAFG dropped -23.66% vs FLQS's -42.16%.

Which ETF is better, CAFG or FLQS?

On 3-year performance, CAFG leads with 13.70% vs 12.91% for FLQS. On fees, FLQS is cheaper at 0.35% per year. On volatility, CAFG has been the lower-risk option at 3.28%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, CAFG or FLQS?

Over the 3-year period, CAFG has performed better with a 13.70% return vs 12.91%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, CAFG or FLQS?

FLQS is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.59% for CAFG.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, CAFG or FLQS?

FLQS has the higher dividend yield at 1.31%, compared with 0.30% for CAFG.

What is the main difference between CAFG and FLQS?

CAFG tracks Pacer US Small Cap Cash Cows Growth Leaders Index - Benchmark TR Gross, while FLQS tracks LibertyQ U.S. Small Cap Equity Index. They also come from different issuers: Pacer and Franklin Templeton. Their fees differ too: 0.59% for CAFG and 0.35% for FLQS.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

CAFG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.19 vs 1.54), 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.