FOWF vs. COWZ

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

FOWF (Pacer Solactive Whitney Future of Warfare ETF) and COWZ (Pacer US Cash Cows 100 ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - FOWF is a Industrials Equities fund tracking the Solactive Whitney Future of Warfare Index, while COWZ is a Mid Cap Value Equities fund tracking the Pacer US Cash Cows 100 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, FOWF returned 22.10% vs 22.23% for COWZ. A 0.60 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. Both charge a 0.49% expense ratio.

Performance

FOWF vs. COWZ - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Pacer Solactive Whitney Future of Warfare ETF (FOWF) and Pacer US Cash Cows 100 ETF (COWZ). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FOWF achieves a 9.44% return, which is significantly higher than COWZ's 8.18% return.

FOWF

• 1D: -1.88%
• 1M: 3.45%
• YTD: 9.44%
• 6M: 12.30%
• 1Y: 22.10%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

COWZ

• 1D: -0.34%
• 1M: 2.61%
• YTD: 8.18%
• 6M: 9.03%
• 1Y: 22.23%
• 3Y*: 14.44%
• 5Y*: 10.57%
• 10Y*: —

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

FOWF vs. COWZ - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
FOWF Pacer Solactive Whitney Future of Warfare ETF	9.44%	29.15%	0.39%
COWZ Pacer US Cash Cows 100 ETF	8.18%	8.98%	0.56%

Correlation

The correlation between FOWF and COWZ is 0.54, 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	0.54
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 19, 2024	0.60

The correlation between FOWF and COWZ has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.54 to 0.60 - a consistent structural relationship.

FOWF vs. COWZ - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	FOWF	COWZ
Industrials	62.2%	8.4%
Technology	29.2%	16.0%
Communication Services	5.8%	10.4%
Consumer Cyclical	2.0%	11.7%
Basic Materials	0.8%	3.7%
Consumer Defensive	-	10.9%
Energy	-	16.9%
Financial Services	-	-
Healthcare	-	21.8%
Real Estate	-	-
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

FOWF vs. COWZ — Risk / Return Rank

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

FOWF

FOWF Risk / Return Rank: 46
FOWF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 46
FOWF Sortino Ratio Rank: 50
FOWF Omega Ratio Rank: 44
FOWF Calmar Ratio Rank: 45
FOWF Martin Ratio Rank: 44

COWZ

COWZ Risk / Return Rank: 65
COWZ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 59
COWZ Sortino Ratio Rank: 62
COWZ Omega Ratio Rank: 57
COWZ Calmar Ratio Rank: 83
COWZ Martin Ratio Rank: 65

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.

FOWF vs. COWZ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Pacer Solactive Whitney Future of Warfare ETF (FOWF) and Pacer US Cash Cows 100 ETF (COWZ). 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.

	FOWF	COWZ	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.59	2.02	-0.42
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.39	2.98	-0.59
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.28	1.36	-0.08
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.20	4.46	-2.26
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	7.02	12.19	-5.17
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

FOWF vs. COWZ - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FOWF Sharpe Ratio is 1.59, which is comparable to the COWZ Sharpe Ratio of 2.02. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FOWF and COWZ, 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

	FOWF	COWZ	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.59	2.02	-0.42
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.60	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.63	0.65	+0.98

Drawdowns

FOWF vs. COWZ - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FOWF drawdown since its inception was -12.29%, smaller than the maximum COWZ drawdown of -38.63%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FOWF and COWZ.

Drawdown Indicators

	FOWF	COWZ	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-12.29%	-38.63%	+26.34%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-10.08%	-5.00%	-5.08%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-22.00%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-22.00%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.81%	-0.91%	-1.90%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.05%	-4.81%	+2.76%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.16%	1.83%	+1.33%

Volatility

FOWF vs. COWZ - Volatility Comparison

Pacer Solactive Whitney Future of Warfare ETF (FOWF) has a higher volatility of 4.80% compared to Pacer US Cash Cows 100 ETF (COWZ) at 2.56%. This indicates that FOWF's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than COWZ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FOWF	COWZ	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.80%	2.56%	+2.24%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	11.62%	7.12%	+4.50%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	13.94%	11.13%	+2.81%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	16.89%	17.63%	-0.74%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	16.89%	19.93%	-3.04%

FOWF vs. COWZ - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both FOWF and COWZ have an expense ratio of 0.49%.

Dividends

FOWF vs. COWZ - Dividend Comparison

FOWF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.73%, less than COWZ's 1.99% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016
COWZ Pacer US Cash Cows 100 ETF	1.99%	2.19%	1.82%	1.92%	1.96%	1.48%	2.54%	1.96%	1.67%	1.95%	0.13%
FOWF Pacer Solactive Whitney Future of Warfare ETF	0.73%	0.79%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FOWF and COWZ in my portfolio?

FOWF and COWZ have a correlation of 0.54, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, FOWF or COWZ?

FOWF has higher volatility (4.80%) compared to COWZ (2.56%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FOWF dropped -12.29% vs COWZ's -38.63%.

Which ETF is better, FOWF or COWZ?

On 1-year performance, COWZ leads with 22.23% vs 22.10% for FOWF. Both ETFs have the same 0.49% expense ratio. On volatility, COWZ has been the lower-risk option at 2.56%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FOWF or COWZ?

Over the 1-year period, COWZ has performed better with a 22.23% return vs 22.10%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FOWF or COWZ?

FOWF and COWZ have the same expense ratio: 0.49% per year.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, FOWF or COWZ?

COWZ has the higher dividend yield at 1.99%, compared with 0.73% for FOWF.

What is the main difference between FOWF and COWZ?

FOWF is categorized as Industrials Equities, while COWZ is Mid Cap Value Equities. FOWF tracks Solactive Whitney Future of Warfare Index, while COWZ tracks Pacer US Cash Cows 100 Index.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

COWZ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.02 vs 1.59), 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.