EMEQ vs. ECOW

Last updated Aug 4, 2026

EMEQ (Nomura Focused Emerging Markets Equity ETF) and ECOW (Pacer Emerging Markets Cash Cows 100 ETF) are both Emerging Markets Equities funds. EMEQ is actively managed, while ECOW is passively managed. Over the past year, EMEQ returned 113.64% vs 29.12% for ECOW. Their 0.65 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. EMEQ charges 0.86%/yr vs 0.70%/yr for ECOW.

Performance

EMEQ vs. ECOW - Performance Comparison

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, EMEQ achieves a 55.77% return, which is significantly higher than ECOW's 12.88% return.

EMEQ

• 1D: 1.31%
• 1M: -7.03%
• 6M: 33.20%
• YTD: 55.77%
• 1Y: 113.64%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 65.83%

ECOW

• 1D: -0.14%
• 1M: 3.07%
• 6M: 4.72%
• YTD: 12.88%
• 1Y: 29.12%
• 3Y*: 17.21%
• 5Y*: 6.83%
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 7.32%

*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	$573.24K	$693.96K	$1.37M
EMEQ Nomura Focused Emerging Markets Equity ETF	$8.80M	$8.80M	$11.41M

EMEQ vs. ECOW - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
EMEQ Nomura Focused Emerging Markets Equity ETF	55.77%	69.78%	-0.73%
ECOW Pacer Emerging Markets Cash Cows 100 ETF	12.88%	32.50%	-0.10%

Correlation

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

EMEQ vs. ECOW - Sectors Allocation Comparison

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

Return for Risk

EMEQ vs. ECOW — Risk / Return Rank

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

EMEQ

EMEQ Risk / Return Rank: 92
EMEQ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 95
EMEQ Sortino Ratio Rank: 89
EMEQ Omega Ratio Rank: 91
EMEQ Calmar Ratio Rank: 92
EMEQ Martin Ratio Rank: 91

ECOW

ECOW Risk / Return Rank: 80
ECOW Sharpe Ratio Rank: 82
ECOW Sortino Ratio Rank: 80
ECOW Omega Ratio Rank: 81
ECOW Calmar Ratio Rank: 86
ECOW Martin Ratio Rank: 72

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.

EMEQ vs. ECOW - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

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

	EMEQ	ECOW	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.83	1.98	+0.85
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.10	2.70	+0.39
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.44	1.36	+0.08
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.35	3.50	+0.85
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	15.65	9.20	+6.45

EMEQ vs. ECOW - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EMEQ Sharpe Ratio is 2.83, which is higher than the ECOW Sharpe Ratio of 1.98. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EMEQ and ECOW, 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

EMEQ vs. ECOW - Drawdown Comparison

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

Drawdown Indicators

	EMEQ	ECOW	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-26.25%	-40.27%	+14.02%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-26.25%	-8.35%	-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	-19.83%	-3.72%	-16.11%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-4.70%	-10.93%	+6.23%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	7.29%	3.17%	+4.12%

Volatility

EMEQ vs. ECOW - Volatility Comparison

Nomura Focused Emerging Markets Equity ETF (EMEQ) has a higher volatility of 14.69% compared to Pacer Emerging Markets Cash Cows 100 ETF (ECOW) at 3.45%. This indicates that EMEQ's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than ECOW based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	EMEQ	ECOW	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	14.69%	3.45%	+11.24%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	37.55%	11.82%	+25.73%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	40.45%	14.78%	+25.67%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	34.13%	17.73%	+16.40%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	34.13%	20.03%	+14.10%

EMEQ vs. ECOW - Expense Ratio Comparison

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

Dividends

EMEQ vs. ECOW - Dividend Comparison

EMEQ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.77%, less than ECOW's 4.45% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019
ECOW Pacer Emerging Markets Cash Cows 100 ETF	4.45%	5.20%	7.35%	5.46%	7.50%	4.39%	3.35%	8.08%
EMEQ Nomura Focused Emerging Markets Equity ETF	1.77%	2.76%	0.84%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both EMEQ and ECOW in my portfolio?

EMEQ and ECOW 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, EMEQ or ECOW?

EMEQ has higher volatility (14.69%) compared to ECOW (3.45%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EMEQ dropped -26.25% vs ECOW's -40.27%.

Which ETF is better, EMEQ or ECOW?

On 1-year performance, EMEQ leads with 113.64% vs 29.12% for ECOW. On fees, ECOW is cheaper at 0.70% per year. On volatility, ECOW has been the lower-risk option at 3.45%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, EMEQ or ECOW?

Over the 1-year period, EMEQ has performed better with a 113.64% return vs 29.12%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, EMEQ or ECOW?

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

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

ECOW has the higher dividend yield at 4.45%, compared with 1.77% for EMEQ.

What is the main difference between EMEQ and ECOW?

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

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

EMEQ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.83 vs 1.98), 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.