PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
COWG vs. XLG
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

COWG vs. XLG - 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 Invesco S&P 500 Top 50 ETF (XLG). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, COWG achieves a 7.76% return, which is significantly higher than XLG's 2.89% return.


COWG

1D
0.19%
1M
-2.55%
6M
7.42%
YTD
7.76%
1Y
10.38%
3Y*
19.27%
5Y*
10Y*
ALL TIME*
19.87%

XLG

1D
1.06%
1M
0.07%
6M
3.36%
YTD
2.89%
1Y
15.84%
3Y*
20.00%
5Y*
13.72%
10Y*
16.35%
ALL TIME*
11.32%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Liquidity Comparison


PositionAvg. Volume Value (2W)Avg. Volume Value (1M)Avg. Volume Value (3M)
$10.58M$10.02M$10.58M
$61.04M$60.71M$102.52M

COWG vs. XLG - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)2025202420232022
COWG
Pacer US Large Cap Cash Cows Growth Leaders ETF
7.76%10.24%34.99%20.69%-0.68%
XLG
Invesco S&P 500 Top 50 ETF
2.89%19.51%33.49%38.16%-1.44%

Correlation

The correlation between COWG and XLG is 0.76, 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.

0.76

Correlation (3Y)
Balances recent behavior with more history.

0.80

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 22, 2022

0.81

The correlation between COWG and XLG has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.76 to 0.81 - a consistent structural relationship.

COWG vs. XLG - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
COWG
XLG

Technology

59.8%
49.8%

Healthcare

13.1%
6.8%

Communication Services

8.6%
13.0%

Energy

6.7%
2.5%

Basic Materials

3.4%
0.6%

Industrials

3.1%
1.9%

Consumer Defensive

2.7%
5.1%

Consumer Cyclical

2.7%
9.3%

Utilities

1.4%
0.7%

Financial Services

-

10.3%

Real Estate

-

-

Technology

COWG
59.8%
XLG
49.8%

Healthcare

COWG
13.1%
XLG
6.8%

Communication Services

COWG
8.6%
XLG
13.0%

Energy

COWG
6.7%
XLG
2.5%

Basic Materials

COWG
3.4%
XLG
0.6%

Industrials

COWG
3.1%
XLG
1.9%

Consumer Defensive

COWG
2.7%
XLG
5.1%

Consumer Cyclical

COWG
2.7%
XLG
9.3%

Utilities

COWG
1.4%
XLG
0.7%

Financial Services

COWG

-

XLG
10.3%

Real Estate

COWG

-

XLG

-

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. XLG — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

COWG
COWG Risk / Return Rank: 2424
Overall Rank
COWG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2323
Sharpe Ratio Rank
COWG Sortino Ratio Rank: 2222
Sortino Ratio Rank
COWG Omega Ratio Rank: 2222
Omega Ratio Rank
COWG Calmar Ratio Rank: 2727
Calmar Ratio Rank
COWG Martin Ratio Rank: 2727
Martin Ratio Rank

XLG
XLG Risk / Return Rank: 3535
Overall Rank
XLG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3737
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XLG Sortino Ratio Rank: 3636
Sortino Ratio Rank
XLG Omega Ratio Rank: 3535
Omega Ratio Rank
XLG Calmar Ratio Rank: 3333
Calmar Ratio Rank
XLG Martin Ratio Rank: 3535
Martin Ratio Rank
The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

COWG vs. XLG - 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 S&P 500 Top 50 ETF (XLG). 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.


COWGXLGDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.42

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.53

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.10

1.17

-0.07

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

0.84

1.10

-0.25

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

2.26

3.41

-1.15

COWG vs. XLG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current COWG Sharpe Ratio is 0.50, which is lower than the XLG Sharpe Ratio of 0.92. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of COWG and XLG, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Drawdowns

COWG vs. XLG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum COWG drawdown since its inception was -23.60%, smaller than the maximum XLG drawdown of -52.39%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for COWG and XLG.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


COWGXLGDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-23.60%

-52.39%

+28.79%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-10.79%

-12.41%

+1.62%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-23.60%

-20.70%

-2.90%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-28.02%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-30.46%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-5.60%

-5.74%

+0.14%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-3.30%

-7.62%

+4.32%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

4.01%

3.98%

+0.03%

Volatility

COWG vs. XLG - Volatility Comparison

Pacer US Large Cap Cash Cows Growth Leaders ETF (COWG) has a higher volatility of 5.45% compared to Invesco S&P 500 Top 50 ETF (XLG) at 5.03%. This indicates that COWG's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than XLG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


COWGXLGDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

5.45%

5.03%

+0.42%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

14.42%

11.54%

+2.88%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

18.07%

14.75%

+3.32%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

19.33%

18.89%

+0.44%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

19.33%

18.92%

+0.41%

COWG vs. XLG - Expense Ratio Comparison

COWG has a 0.49% expense ratio, which is higher than XLG's 0.20% expense ratio.


Dividends

COWG vs. XLG - Dividend Comparison

COWG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.37%, less than XLG's 0.65% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
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%
XLG
Invesco S&P 500 Top 50 ETF
0.65%0.64%0.72%0.97%1.34%0.94%1.25%1.58%2.00%1.85%2.00%2.09%

Frequently Asked Questions


COWG and XLG 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.

COWG has higher volatility (5.45%) compared to XLG (5.03%). In terms of maximum drawdown, COWG dropped -23.60% vs XLG's -52.39%.

On 3-year performance, XLG leads with 20.00% vs 19.27% for COWG. On fees, XLG is cheaper at 0.20% per year. On volatility, XLG has been the lower-risk option at 5.03%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 3-year period, XLG has performed better with a 20.00% return vs 19.27%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

XLG is cheaper with a 0.20% expense ratio, compared with 0.49% for COWG.

XLG has the higher dividend yield at 0.65%, compared with 0.37% for COWG.

COWG is categorized as Large Cap Growth Equities, while XLG is S&P 500. COWG tracks Pacer US Large Cap Cash Cows Growth Leaders Index, while XLG tracks S&P 500 Top 50 Index. They also come from different issuers: Pacer and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.49% for COWG and 0.20% for XLG.

XLG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.92 vs 0.50), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for COWG and XLG

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