EAFG vs. COWZ

Last updated Aug 2, 2026

EAFG (Pacer Developed Markets Cash Cows Growth Leaders ETF) and COWZ (Pacer US Cash Cows 100 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 COWZ is a Mid Cap Value Equities fund tracking the Pacer US Cash Cows 100 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, EAFG returned 21.54% vs 23.82% for COWZ. Their 0.46 correlation means their historical movements had little consistent relationship. EAFG charges 0.65%/yr vs 0.49%/yr for COWZ.

Performance

EAFG vs. COWZ - 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 Cash Cows 100 ETF (COWZ). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, EAFG achieves a 6.96% return, which is significantly lower than COWZ's 11.74% return.

EAFG

• 1D: -0.18%
• 1M: -3.52%
• 6M: 2.12%
• YTD: 6.96%
• 1Y: 21.54%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 10.72%

COWZ

• 1D: 0.19%
• 1M: 4.89%
• 6M: 7.97%
• YTD: 11.74%
• 1Y: 23.82%
• 3Y*: 11.64%
• 5Y*: 10.98%
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 12.98%

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
COWZ Pacer US Cash Cows 100 ETF	$65.11M	$58.70M	$60.07M
EAFG Pacer Developed Markets Cash Cows Growth Leaders ETF	$5.23K	$5.79K	$11.97K

EAFG vs. COWZ - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
EAFG Pacer Developed Markets Cash Cows Growth Leaders ETF	6.96%	26.39%	-5.92%
COWZ Pacer US Cash Cows 100 ETF	11.74%	8.98%	0.58%

Correlation

The correlation between EAFG and COWZ is 0.28, which is low. Their historical price movements had little consistent relationship.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.28
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 21, 2024	0.46

The correlation between EAFG and COWZ shifts across timeframes, from 0.28 (1 year) to 0.46 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

EAFG vs. COWZ - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	EAFG	COWZ
Technology	29.5%	22.9%
Healthcare	15.0%	19.9%
Industrials	14.8%	8.4%
Basic Materials	9.4%	4.0%
Communication Services	9.1%	8.8%
Consumer Cyclical	8.2%	14.3%
Consumer Defensive	4.0%	10.6%
Energy	2.8%	11.2%
Utilities	2.0%	-
Financial Services	0.6%	-
Real Estate	-	-

Return for Risk

EAFG vs. COWZ — Risk / Return Rank

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

EAFG

EAFG Risk / Return Rank: 45
EAFG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 45
EAFG Sortino Ratio Rank: 43
EAFG Omega Ratio Rank: 43
EAFG Calmar Ratio Rank: 47
EAFG Martin Ratio Rank: 48

COWZ

COWZ Risk / Return Rank: 85
COWZ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 83
COWZ Sortino Ratio Rank: 86
COWZ Omega Ratio Rank: 82
COWZ Calmar Ratio Rank: 90
COWZ Martin Ratio Rank: 83

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.

EAFG vs. COWZ - 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 Cash Cows 100 ETF (COWZ). 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.

	EAFG	COWZ	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.13	1.93	-0.80
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.61	2.86	-1.24
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.20	1.34	-0.14
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.71	3.83	-2.12
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	5.57	11.22	-5.64

EAFG vs. COWZ - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EAFG Sharpe Ratio is 1.13, which is lower than the COWZ Sharpe Ratio of 1.93. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EAFG and COWZ, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

EAFG vs. COWZ - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EAFG drawdown since its inception was -16.47%, smaller than the maximum COWZ drawdown of -38.63%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EAFG and COWZ.

Drawdown Indicators

	EAFG	COWZ	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-16.47%	-38.63%	+22.16%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-12.71%	-5.95%	-6.76%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-22.00%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-22.00%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-7.46%	-1.40%	-6.06%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.27%	-4.77%	+1.50%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.90%	2.03%	+1.87%

Volatility

EAFG vs. COWZ - Volatility Comparison

Pacer Developed Markets Cash Cows Growth Leaders ETF (EAFG) has a higher volatility of 6.34% compared to Pacer US Cash Cows 100 ETF (COWZ) at 5.04%. This indicates that EAFG's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than COWZ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	EAFG	COWZ	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.34%	5.04%	+1.30%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	17.11%	8.74%	+8.37%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	19.37%	11.91%	+7.46%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	17.88%	17.69%	+0.19%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	17.88%	19.86%	-1.98%

EAFG vs. COWZ - Expense Ratio Comparison

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

Dividends

EAFG vs. COWZ - Dividend Comparison

EAFG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.04%, more than COWZ's 1.85% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016
COWZ Pacer US Cash Cows 100 ETF	1.85%	2.19%	1.82%	1.92%	1.96%	1.48%	2.54%	1.96%	1.67%	1.95%	0.13%
EAFG Pacer Developed Markets Cash Cows Growth Leaders ETF	2.04%	1.31%	1.99%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both EAFG and COWZ in my portfolio?

EAFG and COWZ have a correlation of 0.28, 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 COWZ?

EAFG has higher volatility (6.34%) compared to COWZ (5.04%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EAFG dropped -16.47% vs COWZ's -38.63%.

Which ETF is better, EAFG or COWZ?

On 1-year performance, COWZ leads with 23.82% vs 21.54% for EAFG. On fees, COWZ is cheaper at 0.49% per year. On volatility, COWZ has been the lower-risk option at 5.04%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, EAFG or COWZ?

Over the 1-year period, COWZ has performed better with a 23.82% return vs 21.54%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, EAFG or COWZ?

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

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

EAFG has the higher dividend yield at 2.04%, compared with 1.85% for COWZ.

What is the main difference between EAFG and COWZ?

EAFG is categorized as Foreign Large Cap Equities, while COWZ is Mid Cap Value Equities. EAFG tracks Pacer Developed Markets Cash Cows Growth Leaders Index, while COWZ tracks Pacer US Cash Cows 100 Index. Their fees differ too: 0.65% for EAFG and 0.49% for COWZ.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

COWZ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.93 vs 1.13), 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.