COWG vs. QMOM

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

COWG (Pacer US Large Cap Cash Cows Growth Leaders ETF) and QMOM (Alpha Architect U.S. Quantitative Momentum 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 QMOM is a Momentum fund actively managed by Alpha Architect. COWG is passively managed, while QMOM is actively managed. Over the past 3 years, COWG returned 24.53%/yr vs 23.22%/yr for QMOM. A 0.79 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. COWG charges 0.49%/yr vs 0.28%/yr for QMOM.

Performance

COWG vs. QMOM - 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 Alpha Architect U.S. Quantitative Momentum ETF (QMOM). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, COWG achieves a 12.50% return, which is significantly lower than QMOM's 24.65% return.

COWG

• 1D: 0.07%
• 1M: 8.17%
• YTD: 12.50%
• 6M: 12.76%
• 1Y: 13.36%
• 3Y*: 24.53%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

QMOM

• 1D: -0.37%
• 1M: 6.10%
• YTD: 24.65%
• 6M: 26.71%
• 1Y: 31.51%
• 3Y*: 23.22%
• 5Y*: 11.55%
• 10Y*: 13.82%

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

COWG vs. QMOM - 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%
QMOM Alpha Architect U.S. Quantitative Momentum ETF	24.65%	2.36%	30.43%	9.50%	-0.05%

Correlation

The correlation between COWG and QMOM is 0.76, 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	0.76
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.80
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 23, 2022	0.79

The correlation between COWG and QMOM has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.76 to 0.80 - a consistent structural relationship.

COWG vs. QMOM - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	COWG	QMOM
Technology	48.5%	23.9%
Healthcare	21.0%	8.9%
Energy	8.4%	5.5%
Basic Materials	6.5%	9.0%
Communication Services	5.2%	4.2%
Industrials	3.6%	37.5%
Consumer Cyclical	3.2%	7.4%
Consumer Defensive	2.0%	1.6%
Utilities	1.5%	2.0%
Financial Services	-	1.9%
Real Estate	-	-

Return for Risk

COWG vs. QMOM — Risk / Return Rank

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

COWG

COWG Risk / Return Rank: 24
COWG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 23
COWG Sortino Ratio Rank: 23
COWG Omega Ratio Rank: 22
COWG Calmar Ratio Rank: 26
COWG Martin Ratio Rank: 26

QMOM

QMOM Risk / Return Rank: 42
QMOM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 37
QMOM Sortino Ratio Rank: 36
QMOM Omega Ratio Rank: 37
QMOM Calmar Ratio Rank: 50
QMOM Martin Ratio Rank: 53

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. QMOM - 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 Alpha Architect U.S. Quantitative Momentum ETF (QMOM). 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	QMOM	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.84	1.36	-0.52
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.24	1.91	-0.67
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.15	1.25	-0.10
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.24	2.50	-1.26
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	3.64	9.15	-5.50
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

COWG vs. QMOM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current COWG Sharpe Ratio is 0.84, which is lower than the QMOM Sharpe Ratio of 1.36. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of COWG and QMOM, 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

	COWG	QMOM	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.84	1.36	-0.52
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.48	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	0.52	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.18	0.52	+0.67

Drawdowns

COWG vs. QMOM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum COWG drawdown since its inception was -23.60%, smaller than the maximum QMOM drawdown of -39.13%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for COWG and QMOM.

Drawdown Indicators

	COWG	QMOM	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-23.60%	-39.13%	+15.53%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-10.79%	-12.65%	+1.86%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-23.60%	-26.46%	+2.86%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-26.82%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-39.13%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	-0.37%	+0.37%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.28%	-12.92%	+9.64%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.67%	3.45%	+0.22%

Volatility

COWG vs. QMOM - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Pacer US Large Cap Cash Cows Growth Leaders ETF (COWG) is 3.67%, while Alpha Architect U.S. Quantitative Momentum ETF (QMOM) has a volatility of 8.32%. This indicates that COWG experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than QMOM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	COWG	QMOM	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.67%	8.32%	-4.65%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	12.01%	19.78%	-7.77%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	15.96%	23.30%	-7.34%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	19.11%	24.19%	-5.08%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	19.11%	26.49%	-7.38%

COWG vs. QMOM - Expense Ratio Comparison

COWG has a 0.49% expense ratio, which is higher than QMOM's 0.28% expense ratio.

Dividends

COWG vs. QMOM - Dividend Comparison

COWG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.30%, less than QMOM's 0.44% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016
COWG Pacer US Large Cap Cash Cows Growth Leaders ETF	0.30%	0.32%	0.40%	0.47%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
QMOM Alpha Architect U.S. Quantitative Momentum ETF	0.44%	0.54%	1.40%	0.87%	1.59%	0.12%	0.08%	0.01%	0.05%	0.13%	0.34%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both COWG and QMOM in my portfolio?

COWG and QMOM have a correlation of 0.76, 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 QMOM?

QMOM has higher volatility (8.32%) compared to COWG (3.67%). In terms of maximum drawdown, COWG dropped -23.60% vs QMOM's -39.13%.

Which ETF is better, COWG or QMOM?

On 3-year performance, COWG leads with 24.53% vs 23.22% for QMOM. On fees, QMOM is cheaper at 0.28% per year. On volatility, COWG has been the lower-risk option at 3.67%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, COWG or QMOM?

Over the 3-year period, COWG has performed better with a 24.53% return vs 23.22%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, COWG or QMOM?

QMOM is cheaper with a 0.28% expense ratio, compared with 0.49% for COWG.

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

QMOM has the higher dividend yield at 0.44%, compared with 0.30% for COWG.

What is the main difference between COWG and QMOM?

COWG is categorized as Mid Cap Growth Equities, while QMOM is Momentum. They also come from different issuers: Pacer and Alpha Architect. Their fees differ too: 0.49% for COWG and 0.28% for QMOM.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

QMOM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.36 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.