ECOW vs. EMEQ

Last updated Aug 2, 2026

ECOW (Pacer Emerging Markets Cash Cows 100 ETF) and EMEQ (Nomura Focused Emerging Markets Equity ETF) are both Emerging Markets Equities funds. ECOW is passively managed, while EMEQ is actively managed. Over the past year, ECOW returned 29.31% vs 110.88% for EMEQ. Their 0.65 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. ECOW charges 0.70%/yr vs 0.86%/yr for EMEQ.

Performance

ECOW vs. EMEQ - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Pacer Emerging Markets Cash Cows 100 ETF (ECOW) and Nomura Focused Emerging Markets Equity ETF (EMEQ). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ECOW achieves a 13.04% return, which is significantly lower than EMEQ's 53.76% return.

ECOW

• 1D: -0.60%
• 1M: 3.22%
• 6M: 5.35%
• YTD: 13.04%
• 1Y: 29.31%
• 3Y*: 16.24%
• 5Y*: 7.26%
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 7.35%

EMEQ

• 1D: 1.33%
• 1M: -8.23%
• 6M: 30.45%
• YTD: 53.76%
• 1Y: 110.88%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 65.06%

*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)
ECOW Pacer Emerging Markets Cash Cows 100 ETF	$617.95K	$706.50K	$1.39M
EMEQ Nomura Focused Emerging Markets Equity ETF	$8.75M	$9.16M	$11.52M

ECOW vs. EMEQ - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
ECOW Pacer Emerging Markets Cash Cows 100 ETF	13.04%	32.50%	-0.10%
EMEQ Nomura Focused Emerging Markets Equity ETF	53.76%	69.78%	-0.73%

Correlation

The correlation between ECOW and EMEQ is 0.61, which is moderate. They have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently, sharing some price drivers without tracking each other closely.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.61
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 5, 2024	0.65

The correlation between ECOW and EMEQ has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.61 to 0.65 - a consistent structural relationship.

ECOW vs. EMEQ - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	ECOW	EMEQ
Communication Services	15.2%	5.5%
Consumer Cyclical	13.9%	6.2%
Consumer Defensive	11.6%	2.7%
Basic Materials	11.2%	1.6%
Industrials	10.7%	6.2%
Energy	10.4%	7.2%
Utilities	6.9%	0.9%
Technology	4.2%	58.0%
Healthcare	3.7%	1.0%
Financial Services	-	11.6%
Real Estate	-	-

Return for Risk

ECOW vs. EMEQ — Risk / Return Rank

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

ECOW

ECOW Risk / Return Rank: 83
ECOW Sharpe Ratio Rank: 86
ECOW Sortino Ratio Rank: 83
ECOW Omega Ratio Rank: 84
ECOW Calmar Ratio Rank: 88
ECOW Martin Ratio Rank: 75

EMEQ

EMEQ Risk / Return Rank: 91
EMEQ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 95
EMEQ Sortino Ratio Rank: 88
EMEQ Omega Ratio Rank: 90
EMEQ Calmar Ratio Rank: 92
EMEQ Martin Ratio Rank: 91

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.

ECOW vs. EMEQ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Pacer Emerging Markets Cash Cows 100 ETF (ECOW) and Nomura Focused Emerging Markets Equity ETF (EMEQ). 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.

	ECOW	EMEQ	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.02	2.69	-0.67
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.74	2.99	-0.25
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.37	1.43	-0.06
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.56	4.13	-0.57
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	9.38	15.08	-5.70

ECOW vs. EMEQ - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ECOW Sharpe Ratio is 2.02, which is comparable to the EMEQ Sharpe Ratio of 2.69. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ECOW and EMEQ, 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

ECOW vs. EMEQ - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ECOW drawdown since its inception was -40.27%, which is greater than EMEQ's maximum drawdown of -26.25%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ECOW and EMEQ.

Drawdown Indicators

	ECOW	EMEQ	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-40.27%	-26.25%	-14.02%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-8.35%	-26.25%	+17.90%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-18.77%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-33.30%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-3.58%	-20.86%	+17.28%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-10.94%	-4.67%	-6.27%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.16%	7.18%	-4.02%

Volatility

ECOW vs. EMEQ - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Pacer Emerging Markets Cash Cows 100 ETF (ECOW) is 3.51%, while Nomura Focused Emerging Markets Equity ETF (EMEQ) has a volatility of 14.87%. This indicates that ECOW experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than EMEQ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	ECOW	EMEQ	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.51%	14.87%	-11.36%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	11.99%	37.54%	-25.55%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	14.81%	40.39%	-25.58%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	17.73%	34.15%	-16.42%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	20.04%	34.15%	-14.11%

ECOW vs. EMEQ - Expense Ratio Comparison

ECOW has a 0.70% expense ratio, which is lower than EMEQ's 0.86% expense ratio.

Dividends

ECOW vs. EMEQ - Dividend Comparison

ECOW's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.44%, more than EMEQ's 1.79% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019
ECOW Pacer Emerging Markets Cash Cows 100 ETF	4.44%	5.20%	7.35%	5.46%	7.50%	4.39%	3.35%	8.08%
EMEQ Nomura Focused Emerging Markets Equity ETF	1.79%	2.76%	0.84%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both ECOW and EMEQ in my portfolio?

ECOW and EMEQ 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, ECOW or EMEQ?

EMEQ has higher volatility (14.87%) compared to ECOW (3.51%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ECOW dropped -40.27% vs EMEQ's -26.25%.

Which ETF is better, ECOW or EMEQ?

On 1-year performance, EMEQ leads with 110.88% vs 29.31% for ECOW. On fees, ECOW is cheaper at 0.70% per year. On volatility, ECOW has been the lower-risk option at 3.51%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, ECOW or EMEQ?

Over the 1-year period, EMEQ has performed better with a 110.88% return vs 29.31%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, ECOW or EMEQ?

ECOW is cheaper with a 0.70% expense ratio, compared with 0.86% for EMEQ.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, ECOW or EMEQ?

ECOW has the higher dividend yield at 4.44%, compared with 1.79% for EMEQ.

What is the main difference between ECOW and EMEQ?

They also come from different issuers: Pacer and Nomura. Their fees differ too: 0.70% for ECOW and 0.86% for EMEQ.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

EMEQ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.69 vs 2.02), 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.