COWG vs. QDPL
COWG (Pacer US Large Cap Cash Cows Growth Leaders ETF) and QDPL (Pacer Metaurus US Large Cap Dividend Multiplier 400 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 QDPL is a Large Cap Blend Equities fund actively managed by Pacer. COWG is passively managed, while QDPL is actively managed. Over the past 3 years, COWG returned 24.53%/yr vs 20.64%/yr for QDPL. Their correlation of 0.85 suggests significant overlap in exposure. COWG charges 0.49%/yr vs 0.60%/yr for QDPL.
Performance
COWG vs. QDPL - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, COWG achieves a 12.50% return, which is significantly higher than QDPL's 10.40% return.
COWG
- 1D
- 0.07%
- 1M
- 8.17%
- YTD
- 12.50%
- 6M
- 12.76%
- 1Y
- 13.36%
- 3Y*
- 24.53%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
QDPL
- 1D
- -0.65%
- 1M
- 5.23%
- YTD
- 10.40%
- 6M
- 10.54%
- 1Y
- 26.37%
- 3Y*
- 20.64%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
COWG vs. QDPL - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
COWG Pacer US Large Cap Cash Cows Growth Leaders ETF | 12.50% | 10.24% | 34.99% | 20.69% | -0.68% |
QDPL Pacer Metaurus US Large Cap Dividend Multiplier 400 ETF | 10.40% | 16.52% | 22.83% | 23.66% | 0.49% |
Correlation
The correlation between COWG and QDPL is 0.81, 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 | 0.81 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.84 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 23, 2022 | 0.85 |
The correlation between COWG and QDPL has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.81 to 0.85 - a consistent structural relationship.
COWG vs. QDPL - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
COWG
QDPL
Technology
Healthcare
Energy
Basic Materials
Communication Services
Industrials
Consumer Cyclical
Consumer Defensive
Utilities
Financial Services
-
Real Estate
-
Technology
COWG
QDPL
Healthcare
COWG
QDPL
Energy
COWG
QDPL
Basic Materials
COWG
QDPL
Communication Services
COWG
QDPL
Industrials
COWG
QDPL
Consumer Cyclical
COWG
QDPL
Consumer Defensive
COWG
QDPL
Utilities
COWG
QDPL
Financial Services
COWG
-
QDPL
Real Estate
COWG
-
QDPL
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. QDPL — Risk / Return Rank
COWG
QDPL
COWG vs. QDPL - 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 Pacer Metaurus US Large Cap Dividend Multiplier 400 ETF (QDPL). 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.
| COWG | QDPL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -1.39 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -1.87 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.15 | 1.41 | -0.25 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.24 | 3.06 | -1.82 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 3.64 | 14.37 | -10.73 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| COWG | QDPL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.84 | 2.23 | -1.39 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 1.18 | 0.83 | +0.35 |
Drawdowns
COWG vs. QDPL - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum COWG drawdown since its inception was -23.60%, roughly equal to the maximum QDPL drawdown of -22.59%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for COWG and QDPL.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| COWG | QDPL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -23.60% | -22.59% | -1.01% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -10.79% | -8.65% | -2.14% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -23.60% | -17.75% | -5.85% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | 0.00% | -0.65% | +0.65% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -3.28% | -5.14% | +1.86% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.67% | 1.84% | +1.83% |
Volatility
COWG vs. QDPL - Volatility Comparison
Pacer US Large Cap Cash Cows Growth Leaders ETF (COWG) has a higher volatility of 3.67% compared to Pacer Metaurus US Large Cap Dividend Multiplier 400 ETF (QDPL) at 2.69%. This indicates that COWG's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than QDPL based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| COWG | QDPL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 3.67% | 2.69% | +0.98% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 12.01% | 9.00% | +3.01% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 15.96% | 11.89% | +4.07% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 19.11% | 15.01% | +4.10% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 19.11% | 15.01% | +4.10% |
COWG vs. QDPL - Expense Ratio Comparison
COWG has a 0.49% expense ratio, which is lower than QDPL's 0.60% expense ratio.
Dividends
COWG vs. QDPL - Dividend Comparison
COWG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.30%, less than QDPL's 5.05% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
COWG Pacer US Large Cap Cash Cows Growth Leaders ETF | 0.30% | 0.32% | 0.40% | 0.47% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
QDPL Pacer Metaurus US Large Cap Dividend Multiplier 400 ETF | 5.05% | 4.84% | 5.43% | 6.30% | 7.27% | 2.44% |
Frequently Asked Questions
COWG and QDPL have a correlation of 0.81, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
COWG has higher volatility (3.67%) compared to QDPL (2.69%). In terms of maximum drawdown, COWG dropped -23.60% vs QDPL's -22.59%.
On 3-year performance, COWG leads with 24.53% vs 20.64% for QDPL. On fees, COWG is cheaper at 0.49% per year. On volatility, QDPL has been the lower-risk option at 2.69%. 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 24.53% return vs 20.64%. 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 0.60% for QDPL.
QDPL has the higher dividend yield at 5.05%, compared with 0.30% for COWG.
COWG is categorized as Mid Cap Growth Equities, while QDPL is Large Cap Blend Equities. Their fees differ too: 0.49% for COWG and 0.60% for QDPL.
QDPL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.23 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.
Find the right allocation for COWG and QDPL
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