DIVL vs. GCOW

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

DIVL (Madison Dividend Value ETF) and GCOW (Pacer Global Cash Cows Dividend ETF) are both Large Cap Value Equities funds. DIVL is actively managed, while GCOW is passively managed. Over the past year, DIVL returned 14.51% vs 27.12% for GCOW. A 0.69 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. DIVL charges 0.65%/yr vs 0.60%/yr for GCOW.

Performance

DIVL vs. GCOW - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Madison Dividend Value ETF (DIVL) and Pacer Global Cash Cows Dividend ETF (GCOW). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, DIVL achieves a 8.16% return, which is significantly lower than GCOW's 12.18% return.

DIVL

• 1D: 0.41%
• 1M: -0.01%
• YTD: 8.16%
• 6M: 7.23%
• 1Y: 14.51%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

GCOW

• 1D: -0.56%
• 1M: 0.09%
• YTD: 12.18%
• 6M: 13.23%
• 1Y: 27.12%
• 3Y*: 17.41%
• 5Y*: 12.34%
• 10Y*: 9.91%

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

DIVL vs. GCOW - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
DIVL Madison Dividend Value ETF	8.16%	9.83%	8.81%	1.81%
GCOW Pacer Global Cash Cows Dividend ETF	12.18%	27.34%	3.52%	6.09%

Correlation

The correlation between DIVL and GCOW is 0.67, 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	0.67
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 16, 2023	0.69

The correlation between DIVL and GCOW has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.67 to 0.69 - a consistent structural relationship.

DIVL vs. GCOW - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	DIVL	GCOW
Energy	17.2%	24.4%
Industrials	16.8%	12.4%
Financial Services	13.8%	-
Healthcare	11.6%	14.6%
Consumer Defensive	10.2%	17.1%
Technology	8.2%	0.9%
Consumer Cyclical	7.7%	4.6%
Basic Materials	6.1%	7.3%
Utilities	6.0%	4.1%
Real Estate	2.4%	-
Communication Services	-	14.6%

Return for Risk

DIVL vs. GCOW — Risk / Return Rank

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

DIVL

DIVL Risk / Return Rank: 40
DIVL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 39
DIVL Sortino Ratio Rank: 40
DIVL Omega Ratio Rank: 38
DIVL Calmar Ratio Rank: 43
DIVL Martin Ratio Rank: 41

GCOW

GCOW Risk / Return Rank: 79
GCOW Sharpe Ratio Rank: 76
GCOW Sortino Ratio Rank: 79
GCOW Omega Ratio Rank: 72
GCOW Calmar Ratio Rank: 90
GCOW Martin Ratio Rank: 77

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.

DIVL vs. GCOW - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Madison Dividend Value ETF (DIVL) and Pacer Global Cash Cows Dividend ETF (GCOW). 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.

	DIVL	GCOW	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.38	2.52	-1.14
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.03	3.63	-1.60
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.25	1.44	-0.19
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.10	5.71	-3.61
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	6.36	15.05	-8.69
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

DIVL vs. GCOW - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current DIVL Sharpe Ratio is 1.38, which is lower than the GCOW Sharpe Ratio of 2.52. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of DIVL and GCOW, 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

	DIVL	GCOW	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.38	2.52	-1.14
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.92	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	0.61	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.84	0.59	+0.25

Drawdowns

DIVL vs. GCOW - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum DIVL drawdown since its inception was -14.06%, smaller than the maximum GCOW drawdown of -37.64%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for DIVL and GCOW.

Drawdown Indicators

	DIVL	GCOW	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-14.06%	-37.64%	+23.58%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-6.93%	-4.77%	-2.16%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-12.35%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-21.48%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-37.64%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-3.34%	-2.73%	-0.61%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.56%	-5.84%	+3.28%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.29%	1.81%	+0.48%

Volatility

DIVL vs. GCOW - Volatility Comparison

Madison Dividend Value ETF (DIVL) has a higher volatility of 3.08% compared to Pacer Global Cash Cows Dividend ETF (GCOW) at 2.85%. This indicates that DIVL's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than GCOW based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	DIVL	GCOW	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.08%	2.85%	+0.23%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	8.05%	7.99%	+0.06%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	10.55%	10.81%	-0.26%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	12.39%	13.49%	-1.10%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	12.39%	16.20%	-3.81%

DIVL vs. GCOW - Expense Ratio Comparison

DIVL has a 0.65% expense ratio, which is higher than GCOW's 0.60% expense ratio.

Dividends

DIVL vs. GCOW - Dividend Comparison

DIVL's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.77%, less than GCOW's 4.43% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016
DIVL Madison Dividend Value ETF	1.77%	1.80%	2.19%	1.01%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
GCOW Pacer Global Cash Cows Dividend ETF	4.43%	4.06%	5.14%	5.28%	4.39%	4.23%	4.12%	4.40%	3.94%	2.79%	1.95%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both DIVL and GCOW in my portfolio?

DIVL and GCOW have a correlation of 0.67, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, DIVL or GCOW?

DIVL has higher volatility (3.08%) compared to GCOW (2.85%). In terms of maximum drawdown, DIVL dropped -14.06% vs GCOW's -37.64%.

Which ETF is better, DIVL or GCOW?

On 1-year performance, GCOW leads with 27.12% vs 14.51% for DIVL. On fees, GCOW is cheaper at 0.60% per year. On volatility, GCOW has been the lower-risk option at 2.85%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, DIVL or GCOW?

Over the 1-year period, GCOW has performed better with a 27.12% return vs 14.51%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, DIVL or GCOW?

GCOW is cheaper with a 0.60% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for DIVL.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, DIVL or GCOW?

GCOW has the higher dividend yield at 4.43%, compared with 1.77% for DIVL.

What is the main difference between DIVL and GCOW?

They also come from different issuers: Madison and Pacer. Their fees differ too: 0.65% for DIVL and 0.60% for GCOW.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

GCOW currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.52 vs 1.38), 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.