COWG vs. PFM
COWG (Pacer US Large Cap Cash Cows Growth Leaders ETF) and PFM (Invesco Dividend Achievers™ ETF) are both Large Cap Growth Equities funds - COWG tracks the Pacer US Large Cap Cash Cows Growth Leaders Index while PFM tracks the NASDAQ US Broad Dividend Achievers Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, COWG returned 21.15%/yr vs 15.73%/yr for PFM. Their 0.71 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. COWG charges 0.49%/yr vs 0.53%/yr for PFM.
Performance
COWG vs. PFM - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, COWG achieves a 8.98% return, which is significantly lower than PFM's 10.65% return.
COWG
- 1D
- 1.13%
- 1M
- -1.45%
- 6M
- 8.27%
- YTD
- 8.98%
- 1Y
- 11.63%
- 3Y*
- 21.15%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- 20.19%
PFM
- 1D
- 0.31%
- 1M
- 1.14%
- 6M
- 7.03%
- YTD
- 10.65%
- 1Y
- 19.46%
- 3Y*
- 15.73%
- 5Y*
- 10.76%
- 10Y*
- 11.56%
- ALL TIME*
- 8.78%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $10.53M | $9.94M | $10.56M | |
| $789.97K | $827.49K | $977.52K |
COWG vs. PFM - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
COWG Pacer US Large Cap Cash Cows Growth Leaders ETF | 8.98% | 10.24% | 34.99% | 20.69% | -0.68% |
PFM Invesco Dividend Achievers™ ETF | 10.65% | 14.00% | 16.87% | 11.40% | -0.22% |
Correlation
The correlation between COWG and PFM is 0.60, 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. | 0.60 |
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history. | 0.68 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 22, 2022 | 0.71 |
The correlation between COWG and PFM shifts across timeframes, from 0.60 (1 year) to 0.71 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
COWG vs. PFM - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
COWG
PFM
Technology
Healthcare
Communication Services
Energy
Basic Materials
Industrials
Consumer Defensive
Consumer Cyclical
Utilities
Financial Services
-
Real Estate
-
Technology
COWG
PFM
Healthcare
COWG
PFM
Communication Services
COWG
PFM
Energy
COWG
PFM
Basic Materials
COWG
PFM
Industrials
COWG
PFM
Consumer Defensive
COWG
PFM
Consumer Cyclical
COWG
PFM
Utilities
COWG
PFM
Financial Services
COWG
-
PFM
Real Estate
COWG
-
PFM
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
Return for Risk
COWG vs. PFM — Risk / Return Rank
COWG
PFM
COWG vs. PFM - 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 Invesco Dividend Achievers™ ETF (PFM). 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 | PFM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -1.42 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -2.01 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.12 | 1.38 | -0.26 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.08 | 2.75 | -1.67 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 2.90 | 11.27 | -8.37 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
COWG vs. PFM - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum COWG drawdown since its inception was -23.60%, smaller than the maximum PFM drawdown of -53.21%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for COWG and PFM.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| COWG | PFM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -23.60% | -53.21% | +29.61% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -10.79% | -7.09% | -3.70% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -23.60% | -14.50% | -9.10% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -17.81% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -32.22% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -4.53% | -0.70% | -3.83% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -3.30% | -6.89% | +3.59% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 4.02% | 1.73% | +2.29% |
Volatility
COWG vs. PFM - Volatility Comparison
Pacer US Large Cap Cash Cows Growth Leaders ETF (COWG) has a higher volatility of 5.34% compared to Invesco Dividend Achievers™ ETF (PFM) at 2.43%. This indicates that COWG's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than PFM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| COWG | PFM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 5.34% | 2.43% | +2.91% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 14.20% | 7.12% | +7.08% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 18.09% | 9.46% | +8.63% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 19.33% | 13.47% | +5.86% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 19.33% | 15.19% | +4.14% |
COWG vs. PFM - Expense Ratio Comparison
COWG has a 0.49% expense ratio, which is lower than PFM's 0.53% expense ratio.
Dividends
COWG vs. PFM - Dividend Comparison
COWG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.37%, less than PFM's 1.32% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
COWG Pacer US Large Cap Cash Cows Growth Leaders ETF | 0.37% | 0.32% | 0.40% | 0.47% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
PFM Invesco Dividend Achievers™ ETF | 1.32% | 1.41% | 1.58% | 1.86% | 1.95% | 1.69% | 1.92% | 1.94% | 2.27% | 1.70% | 2.56% | 2.36% |
Frequently Asked Questions
COWG and PFM have a correlation of 0.60, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
COWG has higher volatility (5.34%) compared to PFM (2.43%). In terms of maximum drawdown, COWG dropped -23.60% vs PFM's -53.21%.
On 3-year performance, COWG leads with 21.15% vs 15.73% for PFM. On fees, COWG is cheaper at 0.49% per year. On volatility, PFM has been the lower-risk option at 2.43%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 3-year period, COWG has performed better with a 21.15% return vs 15.73%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
COWG is cheaper with a 0.49% expense ratio, compared with 0.53% for PFM.
PFM has the higher dividend yield at 1.32%, compared with 0.37% for COWG.
COWG tracks Pacer US Large Cap Cash Cows Growth Leaders Index, while PFM tracks NASDAQ US Broad Dividend Achievers Index. They also come from different issuers: Pacer and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.49% for COWG and 0.53% for PFM.
PFM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.07 vs 0.65), 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.
Find the right allocation for COWG and PFM
Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.
Open Portfolio Optimizer