EAFG vs. IPOS

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

EAFG (Pacer Developed Markets Cash Cows Growth Leaders ETF) and IPOS (Renaissance International IPO ETF) are both Foreign Large Cap Equities funds - EAFG tracks the Pacer Developed Markets Cash Cows Growth Leaders Index while IPOS tracks the Renaissance International IPO Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, EAFG returned 24.38% vs 76.08% for IPOS. A 0.62 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. EAFG charges 0.65%/yr vs 0.80%/yr for IPOS.

Performance

EAFG vs. IPOS - 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 Renaissance International IPO ETF (IPOS). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, EAFG achieves a 11.36% return, which is significantly lower than IPOS's 48.14% return.

EAFG

• 1D: -3.66%
• 1M: 1.71%
• YTD: 11.36%
• 6M: 10.83%
• 1Y: 24.38%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

IPOS

• 1D: -4.56%
• 1M: 15.69%
• YTD: 48.14%
• 6M: 46.95%
• 1Y: 76.08%
• 3Y*: 20.01%
• 5Y*: -6.66%
• 10Y*: 4.08%

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

EAFG vs. IPOS - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
EAFG Pacer Developed Markets Cash Cows Growth Leaders ETF	11.36%	26.39%	-5.92%
IPOS Renaissance International IPO ETF	48.14%	39.93%	-11.12%

Correlation

The correlation between EAFG and IPOS is 0.61, 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	0.61
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 21, 2024	0.62

The correlation between EAFG and IPOS has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.61 to 0.62 - a consistent structural relationship.

EAFG vs. IPOS - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	EAFG	IPOS
Technology	21.2%	50.2%
Basic Materials	17.0%	3.8%
Industrials	15.1%	13.4%
Healthcare	11.2%	14.9%
Communication Services	9.5%	0.3%
Consumer Cyclical	9.5%	6.3%
Consumer Defensive	6.8%	4.2%
Energy	2.4%	4.9%
Utilities	0.5%	3.1%
Financial Services	0.5%	7.3%
Real Estate	-	-

Return for Risk

EAFG vs. IPOS — 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: 41
EAFG Sortino Ratio Rank: 39
EAFG Omega Ratio Rank: 39
EAFG Calmar Ratio Rank: 42
EAFG Martin Ratio Rank: 46

IPOS

IPOS Risk / Return Rank: 77
IPOS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 79
IPOS Sortino Ratio Rank: 68
IPOS Omega Ratio Rank: 77
IPOS Calmar Ratio Rank: 85
IPOS Martin Ratio Rank: 76

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. IPOS - 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 Renaissance International IPO ETF (IPOS). 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	IPOS	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.33	2.36	-1.03
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.85	2.88	-1.03
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.24	1.42	-0.18
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.93	4.46	-2.53
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	7.06	13.34	-6.28

EAFG vs. IPOS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EAFG Sharpe Ratio is 1.33, which is lower than the IPOS Sharpe Ratio of 2.36. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EAFG and IPOS, 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. IPOS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EAFG drawdown since its inception was -16.47%, smaller than the maximum IPOS drawdown of -73.09%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EAFG and IPOS.

Drawdown Indicators

	EAFG	IPOS	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-16.47%	-73.09%	+56.62%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-12.71%	-17.17%	+4.46%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-34.08%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-69.93%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-73.09%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-3.66%	-37.05%	+33.39%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.16%	-32.02%	+28.86%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.46%	5.72%	-2.26%

Volatility

EAFG vs. IPOS - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Pacer Developed Markets Cash Cows Growth Leaders ETF (EAFG) is 7.56%, while Renaissance International IPO ETF (IPOS) has a volatility of 15.81%. This indicates that EAFG experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than IPOS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	EAFG	IPOS	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	7.56%	15.81%	-8.25%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	16.20%	29.95%	-13.75%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	18.51%	32.50%	-13.99%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	17.69%	27.95%	-10.26%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	17.69%	24.41%	-6.72%

EAFG vs. IPOS - Expense Ratio Comparison

EAFG has a 0.65% expense ratio, which is lower than IPOS's 0.80% expense ratio.

Dividends

EAFG vs. IPOS - Dividend Comparison

EAFG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.96%, more than IPOS's 0.32% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
EAFG Pacer Developed Markets Cash Cows Growth Leaders ETF	1.96%	1.31%	1.99%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
IPOS Renaissance International IPO ETF	0.32%	1.04%	0.93%	0.33%	0.00%	0.00%	0.25%	0.89%	1.12%	0.87%	1.73%	1.08%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both EAFG and IPOS in my portfolio?

EAFG and IPOS have a correlation of 0.61, 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 IPOS?

IPOS has higher volatility (15.81%) compared to EAFG (7.56%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EAFG dropped -16.47% vs IPOS's -73.09%.

Which ETF is better, EAFG or IPOS?

On 1-year performance, IPOS leads with 76.08% vs 24.38% for EAFG. On fees, EAFG is cheaper at 0.65% per year. On volatility, EAFG has been the lower-risk option at 7.56%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, EAFG or IPOS?

Over the 1-year period, IPOS has performed better with a 76.08% return vs 24.38%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, EAFG or IPOS?

EAFG is cheaper with a 0.65% expense ratio, compared with 0.80% for IPOS.

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

EAFG has the higher dividend yield at 1.96%, compared with 0.32% for IPOS.

What is the main difference between EAFG and IPOS?

EAFG tracks Pacer Developed Markets Cash Cows Growth Leaders Index, while IPOS tracks Renaissance International IPO Index. They also come from different issuers: Pacer and Renaissance Capital. Their fees differ too: 0.65% for EAFG and 0.80% for IPOS.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

IPOS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.36 vs 1.33), 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.