PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
FBCV vs. GCOW
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

FBCV vs. GCOW - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Fidelity Blue Chip Value ETF (FBCV) and Pacer Global Cash Cows Dividend ETF (GCOW). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FBCV achieves a 9.91% return, which is significantly lower than GCOW's 12.18% return.


FBCV

1D
-0.20%
1M
2.72%
YTD
9.91%
6M
11.56%
1Y
24.49%
3Y*
14.94%
5Y*
8.64%
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)

FBCV vs. GCOW - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020
FBCV
Fidelity Blue Chip Value ETF
9.91%16.36%10.26%5.45%-2.26%26.18%16.98%
GCOW
Pacer Global Cash Cows Dividend ETF
12.18%27.34%3.52%13.95%5.49%14.58%12.55%

Correlation

The correlation between FBCV and GCOW is 0.60, 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

0.60

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.66

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.72

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 5, 2020

0.73

The correlation between FBCV and GCOW shifts across timeframes, from 0.60 (1 year) to 0.73 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

FBCV vs. GCOW - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
FBCV
GCOW

Financial Services

21.6%

-

Industrials

12.2%
12.4%

Healthcare

11.9%
14.6%

Technology

10.1%
0.9%

Energy

10.0%
24.4%

Consumer Defensive

9.8%
17.1%

Consumer Cyclical

9.3%
4.6%

Communication Services

8.3%
14.6%

Basic Materials

3.6%
7.3%

Utilities

2.5%
4.1%

Real Estate

0.8%

-

Financial Services

FBCV
21.6%
GCOW

-

Industrials

FBCV
12.2%
GCOW
12.4%

Healthcare

FBCV
11.9%
GCOW
14.6%

Technology

FBCV
10.1%
GCOW
0.9%

Energy

FBCV
10.0%
GCOW
24.4%

Consumer Defensive

FBCV
9.8%
GCOW
17.1%

Consumer Cyclical

FBCV
9.3%
GCOW
4.6%

Communication Services

FBCV
8.3%
GCOW
14.6%

Basic Materials

FBCV
3.6%
GCOW
7.3%

Utilities

FBCV
2.5%
GCOW
4.1%

Real Estate

FBCV
0.8%
GCOW

-

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.


Return for Risk

FBCV vs. GCOW — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

FBCV
FBCV Risk / Return Rank: 7272
Overall Rank
FBCV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7171
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FBCV Sortino Ratio Rank: 7676
Sortino Ratio Rank
FBCV Omega Ratio Rank: 7070
Omega Ratio Rank
FBCV Calmar Ratio Rank: 7070
Calmar Ratio Rank
FBCV Martin Ratio Rank: 7575
Martin Ratio Rank

GCOW
GCOW Risk / Return Rank: 7979
Overall Rank
GCOW Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7676
Sharpe Ratio Rank
GCOW Sortino Ratio Rank: 7979
Sortino Ratio Rank
GCOW Omega Ratio Rank: 7272
Omega Ratio Rank
GCOW Calmar Ratio Rank: 9090
Calmar Ratio Rank
GCOW Martin Ratio Rank: 7777
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

FBCV vs. GCOW - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Fidelity Blue Chip Value ETF (FBCV) 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.


FBCVGCOWDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.17

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.16

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.43

1.44

-0.01

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.49

5.71

-2.22

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

14.27

15.05

-0.78

FBCV vs. GCOW - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FBCV Sharpe Ratio is 2.35, which is comparable to the GCOW Sharpe Ratio of 2.52. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FBCV 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.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


FBCVGCOWDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.35

2.52

-0.17

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.63

0.92

-0.29

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.61

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.93

0.59

+0.34

Drawdowns

FBCV vs. GCOW - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FBCV drawdown since its inception was -15.55%, smaller than the maximum GCOW drawdown of -37.64%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FBCV and GCOW.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


FBCVGCOWDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-15.55%

-37.64%

+22.09%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-7.04%

-4.77%

-2.27%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-14.32%

-12.35%

-1.97%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-15.55%

-21.48%

+5.93%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-37.64%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.50%

-2.73%

+2.23%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-3.45%

-5.84%

+2.39%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.72%

1.81%

-0.09%

Volatility

FBCV vs. GCOW - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Fidelity Blue Chip Value ETF (FBCV) is 2.18%, while Pacer Global Cash Cows Dividend ETF (GCOW) has a volatility of 2.85%. This indicates that FBCV experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than GCOW based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


FBCVGCOWDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

2.18%

2.85%

-0.67%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

7.66%

7.99%

-0.33%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

10.49%

10.81%

-0.32%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

13.81%

13.49%

+0.32%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

14.73%

16.20%

-1.47%

FBCV vs. GCOW - Expense Ratio Comparison

FBCV has a 0.57% expense ratio, which is lower than GCOW's 0.60% expense ratio.


Dividends

FBCV vs. GCOW - Dividend Comparison

FBCV's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.69%, less than GCOW's 4.43% yield.


PositionTTM2025202420232022202120202019201820172016
FBCV
Fidelity Blue Chip Value ETF
2.69%2.95%1.75%1.68%2.01%3.13%0.44%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


FBCV and GCOW have a correlation of 0.60, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

GCOW has higher volatility (2.85%) compared to FBCV (2.18%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FBCV dropped -15.55% vs GCOW's -37.64%.

On 5-year performance, GCOW leads with 12.34% vs 8.64% for FBCV. On fees, FBCV is cheaper at 0.57% per year. On volatility, FBCV has been the lower-risk option at 2.18%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 5-year period, GCOW has performed better with a 12.34% return vs 8.64%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

FBCV is cheaper with a 0.57% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for GCOW.

GCOW has the higher dividend yield at 4.43%, compared with 2.69% for FBCV.

They also come from different issuers: Fidelity and Pacer. Their fees differ too: 0.57% for FBCV and 0.60% for GCOW.

GCOW currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.52 vs 2.35), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for FBCV and GCOW

Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.

Open Portfolio Optimizer