EAFG vs. GCOW

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

EAFG (Pacer Developed Markets Cash Cows Growth Leaders ETF) and GCOW (Pacer Global Cash Cows Dividend 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 GCOW is a Large Cap Value Equities fund tracking the Pacer Global Cash Cows Dividends Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, EAFG returned 24.58% vs 27.12% for GCOW. A 0.56 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. EAFG charges 0.65%/yr vs 0.60%/yr for GCOW.

Performance

EAFG vs. GCOW - 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 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, EAFG achieves a 10.66% return, which is significantly lower than GCOW's 12.18% return.

EAFG

• 1D: 0.09%
• 1M: 3.24%
• YTD: 10.66%
• 6M: 13.09%
• 1Y: 24.58%
• 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)

EAFG vs. GCOW - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
EAFG Pacer Developed Markets Cash Cows Growth Leaders ETF	10.66%	26.39%	-5.92%
GCOW Pacer Global Cash Cows Dividend ETF	12.18%	27.34%	1.82%

Correlation

The correlation between EAFG and GCOW is 0.44, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.44
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 22, 2024	0.56

The correlation between EAFG and GCOW shifts across timeframes, from 0.44 (1 year) to 0.56 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

EAFG vs. GCOW - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	EAFG	GCOW
Technology	21.2%	0.9%
Basic Materials	17.0%	7.3%
Industrials	15.1%	12.4%
Healthcare	11.2%	14.6%
Communication Services	9.5%	14.6%
Consumer Cyclical	9.5%	4.6%
Consumer Defensive	6.8%	17.1%
Energy	2.4%	24.4%
Utilities	0.5%	4.1%
Financial Services	0.5%	-
Real Estate	-	-

Return for Risk

EAFG vs. GCOW — 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

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.

EAFG vs. GCOW - 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 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.

	EAFG	GCOW	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.43	2.52	-1.09
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	1.94	5.71	-3.77
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	7.26	15.05	-7.79
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. GCOW - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EAFG Sharpe Ratio is 1.43, which is lower than the GCOW Sharpe Ratio of 2.52. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EAFG 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

	EAFG	GCOW	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.43	2.52	-1.09
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	0.78	0.59	+0.19

Drawdowns

EAFG vs. GCOW - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EAFG drawdown since its inception was -16.47%, smaller than the maximum GCOW drawdown of -37.64%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EAFG and GCOW.

Drawdown Indicators

	EAFG	GCOW	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-16.47%	-37.64%	+21.17%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-12.71%	-4.77%	-7.94%
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	-2.47%	-2.73%	+0.26%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.19%	-5.84%	+2.65%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.39%	1.81%	+1.58%

Volatility

EAFG vs. GCOW - Volatility Comparison

Pacer Developed Markets Cash Cows Growth Leaders ETF (EAFG) has a higher volatility of 5.77% compared to Pacer Global Cash Cows Dividend ETF (GCOW) at 2.85%. This indicates that EAFG'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

	EAFG	GCOW	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.77%	2.85%	+2.92%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	14.64%	7.99%	+6.65%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	17.26%	10.81%	+6.45%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	17.24%	13.49%	+3.75%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	17.24%	16.20%	+1.04%

EAFG vs. GCOW - Expense Ratio Comparison

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

Dividends

EAFG vs. GCOW - Dividend Comparison

EAFG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.23%, less than GCOW's 4.43% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016
EAFG Pacer Developed Markets Cash Cows Growth Leaders ETF	1.23%	1.31%	1.99%	0.00%	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 EAFG and GCOW in my portfolio?

EAFG and GCOW have a correlation of 0.44, 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 GCOW?

EAFG has higher volatility (5.77%) compared to GCOW (2.85%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EAFG dropped -16.47% vs GCOW's -37.64%.

Which ETF is better, EAFG or GCOW?

On 1-year performance, GCOW leads with 27.12% vs 24.58% for EAFG. 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, EAFG or GCOW?

Over the 1-year period, GCOW has performed better with a 27.12% return vs 24.58%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, EAFG or GCOW?

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

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

GCOW has the higher dividend yield at 4.43%, compared with 1.23% for EAFG.

What is the main difference between EAFG and GCOW?

EAFG is categorized as Foreign Large Cap Equities, while GCOW is Large Cap Value Equities. EAFG tracks Pacer Developed Markets Cash Cows Growth Leaders Index, while GCOW tracks Pacer Global Cash Cows Dividends Index. Their fees differ too: 0.65% for EAFG and 0.60% for GCOW.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

GCOW currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.52 vs 1.43), 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.