CAFG vs. PBW

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

CAFG (Pacer US Small Cap Cash Cows Growth Leaders ETF) and PBW (Invesco WilderHill Clean Energy ETF) are both Small Cap Growth Equities funds - CAFG tracks the Pacer US Small Cap Cash Cows Growth Leaders Index - Benchmark TR Gross while PBW tracks the The WilderHill Clean Energy Index (AMEX). Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, CAFG returned 15.59%/yr vs 8.67%/yr for PBW. A 0.64 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. CAFG charges 0.59%/yr vs 0.61%/yr for PBW.

Performance

CAFG vs. PBW - 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 Invesco WilderHill Clean Energy ETF (PBW). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CAFG achieves a 27.15% return, which is significantly lower than PBW's 49.86% return.

CAFG

• 1D: 1.09%
• 1M: 2.66%
• YTD: 27.15%
• 6M: 25.89%
• 1Y: 32.91%
• 3Y*: 15.59%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

PBW

• 1D: 0.82%
• 1M: 15.43%
• YTD: 49.86%
• 6M: 42.15%
• 1Y: 151.04%
• 3Y*: 8.67%
• 5Y*: -9.90%
• 10Y*: 10.92%

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

CAFG vs. PBW - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
CAFG Pacer US Small Cap Cash Cows Growth Leaders ETF	27.15%	0.17%	6.95%	20.44%
PBW Invesco WilderHill Clean Energy ETF	49.86%	53.96%	-30.77%	-11.04%

Correlation

The correlation between CAFG and PBW is 0.58, 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	0.58
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.64
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 3, 2023	0.64

The correlation between CAFG and PBW has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.58 to 0.64 - a consistent structural relationship.

CAFG vs. PBW - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	CAFG	PBW
Technology	30.8%	14.3%
Industrials	19.3%	34.3%
Healthcare	18.8%	-
Energy	13.4%	12.3%
Consumer Cyclical	7.2%	13.9%
Communication Services	3.7%	-
Consumer Defensive	3.0%	1.1%
Basic Materials	2.4%	16.4%
Utilities	1.4%	6.3%
Financial Services	-	1.4%
Real Estate	-	-

Return for Risk

CAFG vs. PBW — Risk / Return Rank

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

CAFG

CAFG Risk / Return Rank: 64
CAFG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 57
CAFG Sortino Ratio Rank: 58
CAFG Omega Ratio Rank: 53
CAFG Calmar Ratio Rank: 80
CAFG Martin Ratio Rank: 71

PBW

PBW Risk / Return Rank: 89
PBW Sharpe Ratio Rank: 95
PBW Sortino Ratio Rank: 88
PBW Omega Ratio Rank: 80
PBW Calmar Ratio Rank: 94
PBW Martin Ratio Rank: 89

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. PBW - 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 Invesco WilderHill Clean Energy ETF (PBW). 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.

	CAFG	PBW	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.90	3.77	-1.87
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.72	3.92	-1.20
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.32	1.48	-0.15
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.06	7.15	-3.09
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	13.23	19.85	-6.62
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

CAFG vs. PBW - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CAFG Sharpe Ratio is 1.90, which is lower than the PBW Sharpe Ratio of 3.77. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CAFG and PBW, 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

	CAFG	PBW	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.90	3.77	-1.87
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	-0.23	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	0.28	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.89	-0.03	+0.92

Drawdowns

CAFG vs. PBW - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CAFG drawdown since its inception was -23.66%, smaller than the maximum PBW drawdown of -89.02%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CAFG and PBW.

Drawdown Indicators

	CAFG	PBW	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-23.66%	-89.02%	+65.36%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-8.13%	-21.24%	+13.11%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-23.66%	-68.04%	+44.38%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-84.50%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-89.02%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	-62.23%	+62.23%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-5.52%	-62.91%	+57.39%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.49%	7.64%	-5.15%

Volatility

CAFG vs. PBW - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Pacer US Small Cap Cash Cows Growth Leaders ETF (CAFG) is 4.61%, while Invesco WilderHill Clean Energy ETF (PBW) has a volatility of 13.11%. This indicates that CAFG experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than PBW based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	CAFG	PBW	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.61%	13.11%	-8.50%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	12.78%	28.20%	-15.42%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	17.40%	40.32%	-22.92%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	19.57%	42.91%	-23.34%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	19.57%	38.75%	-19.18%

CAFG vs. PBW - Expense Ratio Comparison

CAFG has a 0.59% expense ratio, which is lower than PBW's 0.61% expense ratio.

Dividends

CAFG vs. PBW - Dividend Comparison

CAFG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.34%, less than PBW's 0.59% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
CAFG Pacer US Small Cap Cash Cows Growth Leaders ETF	0.34%	0.35%	0.36%	0.39%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
PBW Invesco WilderHill Clean Energy ETF	0.59%	0.79%	2.84%	3.68%	4.21%	1.71%	0.44%	1.45%	2.04%	1.28%	2.68%	1.53%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CAFG and PBW in my portfolio?

CAFG and PBW have a correlation of 0.58, 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 PBW?

PBW has higher volatility (13.11%) compared to CAFG (4.61%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CAFG dropped -23.66% vs PBW's -89.02%.

Which ETF is better, CAFG or PBW?

On 3-year performance, CAFG leads with 15.59% vs 8.67% for PBW. On fees, CAFG is cheaper at 0.59% per year. On volatility, CAFG has been the lower-risk option at 4.61%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, CAFG or PBW?

Over the 3-year period, CAFG has performed better with a 15.59% return vs 8.67%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, CAFG or PBW?

CAFG is cheaper with a 0.59% expense ratio, compared with 0.61% for PBW.

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

PBW has the higher dividend yield at 0.59%, compared with 0.34% for CAFG.

What is the main difference between CAFG and PBW?

CAFG tracks Pacer US Small Cap Cash Cows Growth Leaders Index - Benchmark TR Gross, while PBW tracks The WilderHill Clean Energy Index (AMEX). They also come from different issuers: Pacer and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.59% for CAFG and 0.61% for PBW.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

PBW currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.77 vs 1.90), 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.