COWG vs. BAMU

Last updated Jun 23, 2026

COWG (Pacer US Large Cap Cash Cows Growth Leaders ETF) and BAMU (Brookstone Ultra-Short Bond ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - COWG is a Mid Cap Growth Equities fund tracking the Pacer US Large Cap Cash Cows Growth Leaders Index, while BAMU is a Ultrashort Bond fund actively managed by Brookstone. COWG is passively managed, while BAMU is actively managed. Over the past year, COWG returned 14.12% vs 2.91% for BAMU. At a 0.03 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. COWG charges 0.49%/yr vs 1.09%/yr for BAMU.

Performance

COWG vs. BAMU - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Pacer US Large Cap Cash Cows Growth Leaders ETF (COWG) and Brookstone Ultra-Short Bond ETF (BAMU). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, COWG achieves a 10.61% return, which is significantly higher than BAMU's 1.18% return.

COWG

• 1D: 0.08%
• 1M: 1.71%
• YTD: 10.61%
• 6M: 8.49%
• 1Y: 14.12%
• 3Y*: 23.78%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

BAMU

• 1D: 0.02%
• 1M: 0.16%
• YTD: 1.18%
• 6M: 1.23%
• 1Y: 2.91%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

COWG vs. BAMU - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
COWG Pacer US Large Cap Cash Cows Growth Leaders ETF	10.61%	10.24%	34.99%	13.45%
BAMU Brookstone Ultra-Short Bond ETF	1.18%	3.21%	4.14%	1.20%

Correlation

The correlation between COWG and BAMU is -0.10, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.10
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 27, 2023	0.03

The correlation between COWG and BAMU shifts across timeframes, from -0.10 (1 year) to 0.03 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

COWG vs. BAMU — Risk / Return Rank

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

COWG

COWG Risk / Return Rank: 25
COWG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 25
COWG Sortino Ratio Rank: 23
COWG Omega Ratio Rank: 22
COWG Calmar Ratio Rank: 28
COWG Martin Ratio Rank: 28

BAMU

BAMU Risk / Return Rank: 98
BAMU Sharpe Ratio Rank: 98
BAMU Sortino Ratio Rank: 98
BAMU Omega Ratio Rank: 98
BAMU Calmar Ratio Rank: 99
BAMU Martin Ratio Rank: 99

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.

COWG vs. BAMU - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Pacer US Large Cap Cash Cows Growth Leaders ETF (COWG) and Brookstone Ultra-Short Bond ETF (BAMU). 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.

	COWG	BAMU	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.84	5.01	-4.16
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.23	8.84	-7.61
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.15	2.43	-1.27
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.31	24.72	-23.40
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	3.82	97.90	-94.08

COWG vs. BAMU - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current COWG Sharpe Ratio is 0.84, which is lower than the BAMU Sharpe Ratio of 5.01. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of COWG and BAMU, 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

COWG vs. BAMU - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum COWG drawdown since its inception was -23.60%, which is greater than BAMU's maximum drawdown of -0.36%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for COWG and BAMU.

Drawdown Indicators

	COWG	BAMU	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-23.60%	-0.36%	-23.24%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-10.79%	-0.12%	-10.67%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-23.60%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.68%	0.00%	-1.68%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.27%	-0.02%	-3.25%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.71%	0.03%	+3.68%

Volatility

COWG vs. BAMU - Volatility Comparison

Pacer US Large Cap Cash Cows Growth Leaders ETF (COWG) has a higher volatility of 6.72% compared to Brookstone Ultra-Short Bond ETF (BAMU) at 0.09%. This indicates that COWG's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than BAMU based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	COWG	BAMU	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.72%	0.09%	+6.63%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	13.05%	0.40%	+12.65%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	16.86%	0.58%	+16.28%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	19.23%	0.87%	+18.36%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	19.23%	0.87%	+18.36%

COWG vs. BAMU - Expense Ratio Comparison

COWG has a 0.49% expense ratio, which is lower than BAMU's 1.09% expense ratio.

Dividends

COWG vs. BAMU - Dividend Comparison

COWG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.36%, less than BAMU's 3.05% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023
BAMU Brookstone Ultra-Short Bond ETF	3.05%	3.20%	3.97%	0.84%
COWG Pacer US Large Cap Cash Cows Growth Leaders ETF	0.36%	0.32%	0.40%	0.47%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both COWG and BAMU in my portfolio?

COWG and BAMU have a correlation of -0.10, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, COWG or BAMU?

COWG has higher volatility (6.72%) compared to BAMU (0.09%). In terms of maximum drawdown, COWG dropped -23.60% vs BAMU's -0.36%.

Which ETF is better, COWG or BAMU?

On 1-year performance, COWG leads with 14.12% vs 2.91% for BAMU. On fees, COWG is cheaper at 0.49% per year. On volatility, BAMU has been the lower-risk option at 0.09%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, COWG or BAMU?

Over the 1-year period, COWG has performed better with a 14.12% return vs 2.91%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, COWG or BAMU?

COWG is cheaper with a 0.49% expense ratio, compared with 1.09% for BAMU.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, COWG or BAMU?

BAMU has the higher dividend yield at 3.05%, compared with 0.36% for COWG.

What is the main difference between COWG and BAMU?

COWG is categorized as Mid Cap Growth Equities, while BAMU is Ultrashort Bond. They also come from different issuers: Pacer and Brookstone. Their fees differ too: 0.49% for COWG and 1.09% for BAMU.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

BAMU currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (5.01 vs 0.84), 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.