EAFG vs. COWG

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

EAFG (Pacer Developed Markets Cash Cows Growth Leaders ETF) and COWG (Pacer US Large Cap Cash Cows Growth Leaders ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - EAFG is a Foreign Large Cap Equities fund tracking the Pacer Developed Markets Cash Cows Growth Leaders Index, while COWG is a Mid Cap Growth Equities fund tracking the Pacer US Large Cap Cash Cows Growth Leaders Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, EAFG returned 24.58% vs 13.36% for COWG. A 0.68 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. EAFG charges 0.65%/yr vs 0.49%/yr for COWG.

Performance

EAFG vs. COWG - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Pacer Developed Markets Cash Cows Growth Leaders ETF (EAFG) and Pacer US Large Cap Cash Cows Growth Leaders ETF (COWG). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, EAFG achieves a 10.66% return, which is significantly lower than COWG's 12.50% return.

EAFG

• 1D: 0.09%
• 1M: 3.24%
• YTD: 10.66%
• 6M: 13.09%
• 1Y: 24.58%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

COWG

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

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

EAFG vs. COWG - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
EAFG Pacer Developed Markets Cash Cows Growth Leaders ETF	10.66%	26.39%	-5.92%
COWG Pacer US Large Cap Cash Cows Growth Leaders ETF	12.50%	10.24%	22.94%

Correlation

The correlation between EAFG and COWG is 0.71, 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	0.71
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 22, 2024	0.68

The correlation between EAFG and COWG has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.68 to 0.71 - a consistent structural relationship.

EAFG vs. COWG - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	EAFG	COWG
Technology	21.2%	48.5%
Basic Materials	17.0%	6.5%
Industrials	15.1%	3.6%
Healthcare	11.2%	21.0%
Communication Services	9.5%	5.2%
Consumer Cyclical	9.5%	3.2%
Consumer Defensive	6.8%	2.0%
Energy	2.4%	8.4%
Utilities	0.5%	1.5%
Financial Services	0.5%	-
Real Estate	-	-

Return for Risk

EAFG vs. COWG — Risk / Return Rank

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

EAFG

EAFG Risk / Return Rank: 41
EAFG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 42
EAFG Sortino Ratio Rank: 40
EAFG Omega Ratio Rank: 39
EAFG Calmar Ratio Rank: 40
EAFG Martin Ratio Rank: 45

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

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.

EAFG vs. COWG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Pacer Developed Markets Cash Cows Growth Leaders ETF (EAFG) and Pacer US Large Cap Cash Cows Growth Leaders ETF (COWG). 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.

	EAFG	COWG	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	1.43	0.84	+0.59
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	2.03	1.24	+0.79
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.25	1.15	+0.10
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.94	1.24	+0.70
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	7.26	3.64	+3.62
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

EAFG vs. COWG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EAFG Sharpe Ratio is 1.43, which is higher than the COWG Sharpe Ratio of 0.84. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EAFG and COWG, 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

	EAFG	COWG	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.43	0.84	+0.59
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.78	1.18	-0.41

Drawdowns

EAFG vs. COWG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EAFG drawdown since its inception was -16.47%, smaller than the maximum COWG drawdown of -23.60%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EAFG and COWG.

Drawdown Indicators

	EAFG	COWG	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-16.47%	-23.60%	+7.13%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-12.71%	-10.79%	-1.92%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-23.60%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.47%	0.00%	-2.47%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.19%	-3.28%	+0.09%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.39%	3.67%	-0.28%

Volatility

EAFG vs. COWG - Volatility Comparison

Pacer Developed Markets Cash Cows Growth Leaders ETF (EAFG) has a higher volatility of 5.77% compared to Pacer US Large Cap Cash Cows Growth Leaders ETF (COWG) at 3.67%. This indicates that EAFG's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than COWG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	EAFG	COWG	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.77%	3.67%	+2.10%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	14.64%	12.01%	+2.63%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	17.26%	15.96%	+1.30%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	17.24%	19.11%	-1.87%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	17.24%	19.11%	-1.87%

EAFG vs. COWG - Expense Ratio Comparison

EAFG has a 0.65% expense ratio, which is higher than COWG's 0.49% expense ratio.

Dividends

EAFG vs. COWG - Dividend Comparison

EAFG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.23%, more than COWG's 0.30% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023
COWG Pacer US Large Cap Cash Cows Growth Leaders ETF	0.30%	0.32%	0.40%	0.47%
EAFG Pacer Developed Markets Cash Cows Growth Leaders ETF	1.23%	1.31%	1.99%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both EAFG and COWG in my portfolio?

EAFG and COWG have a correlation of 0.71, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, EAFG or COWG?

EAFG has higher volatility (5.77%) compared to COWG (3.67%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EAFG dropped -16.47% vs COWG's -23.60%.

Which ETF is better, EAFG or COWG?

On 1-year performance, EAFG leads with 24.58% vs 13.36% for COWG. On fees, COWG is cheaper at 0.49% 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, EAFG or COWG?

Over the 1-year period, EAFG has performed better with a 24.58% return vs 13.36%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, EAFG or COWG?

COWG is cheaper with a 0.49% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for EAFG.

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

EAFG has the higher dividend yield at 1.23%, compared with 0.30% for COWG.

What is the main difference between EAFG and COWG?

EAFG is categorized as Foreign Large Cap Equities, while COWG is Mid Cap Growth Equities. EAFG tracks Pacer Developed Markets Cash Cows Growth Leaders Index, while COWG tracks Pacer US Large Cap Cash Cows Growth Leaders Index. Their fees differ too: 0.65% for EAFG and 0.49% for COWG.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

EAFG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.43 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.