FOWF vs. QDPL

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

FOWF (Pacer Solactive Whitney Future of Warfare ETF) and QDPL (Pacer Metaurus US Large Cap Dividend Multiplier 400 ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - FOWF is a Industrials Equities fund tracking the Solactive Whitney Future of Warfare Index, while QDPL is a Large Cap Blend Equities fund actively managed by Pacer. FOWF is passively managed, while QDPL is actively managed. Over the past year, FOWF returned 22.10% vs 26.37% for QDPL. A 0.66 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. FOWF charges 0.49%/yr vs 0.60%/yr for QDPL.

Performance

FOWF vs. QDPL - 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 Metaurus US Large Cap Dividend Multiplier 400 ETF (QDPL). 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 lower than QDPL's 10.40% return.

FOWF

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

QDPL

• 1D: -0.65%
• 1M: 5.23%
• YTD: 10.40%
• 6M: 10.54%
• 1Y: 26.37%
• 3Y*: 20.64%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

FOWF vs. QDPL - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
FOWF Pacer Solactive Whitney Future of Warfare ETF	9.44%	29.15%	0.39%
QDPL Pacer Metaurus US Large Cap Dividend Multiplier 400 ETF	10.40%	16.52%	0.07%

Correlation

The correlation between FOWF and QDPL is 0.62, 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	0.62
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 19, 2024	0.66

The correlation between FOWF and QDPL has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.62 to 0.66 - a consistent structural relationship.

FOWF vs. QDPL - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	FOWF	QDPL
Industrials	62.2%	6.3%
Technology	29.2%	27.6%
Communication Services	5.8%	8.5%
Consumer Cyclical	2.0%	8.4%
Basic Materials	0.8%	1.4%
Consumer Defensive	-	4.0%
Energy	-	2.4%
Financial Services	-	10.3%
Healthcare	-	7.6%
Real Estate	-	1.5%
Utilities	-	2.1%

Return for Risk

FOWF vs. QDPL — 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

QDPL

QDPL Risk / Return Rank: 67
QDPL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 66
QDPL Sortino Ratio Rank: 66
QDPL Omega Ratio Rank: 66
QDPL Calmar Ratio Rank: 61
QDPL Martin Ratio Rank: 75

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. QDPL - 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 Metaurus US Large Cap Dividend Multiplier 400 ETF (QDPL). 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	QDPL	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.59	2.23	-0.64
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.39	3.11	-0.71
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.28	1.41	-0.13
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.20	3.06	-0.86
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	7.02	14.37	-7.35
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. QDPL - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FOWF Sharpe Ratio is 1.59, which is comparable to the QDPL Sharpe Ratio of 2.23. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FOWF and QDPL, 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	QDPL	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.59	2.23	-0.64
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.63	0.83	+0.80

Drawdowns

FOWF vs. QDPL - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FOWF drawdown since its inception was -12.29%, smaller than the maximum QDPL drawdown of -22.59%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FOWF and QDPL.

Drawdown Indicators

	FOWF	QDPL	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-12.29%	-22.59%	+10.30%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-10.08%	-8.65%	-1.43%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-17.75%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.81%	-0.65%	-2.16%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.05%	-5.14%	+3.09%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.16%	1.84%	+1.32%

Volatility

FOWF vs. QDPL - Volatility Comparison

Pacer Solactive Whitney Future of Warfare ETF (FOWF) has a higher volatility of 4.80% compared to Pacer Metaurus US Large Cap Dividend Multiplier 400 ETF (QDPL) at 2.69%. This indicates that FOWF's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than QDPL based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FOWF	QDPL	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.80%	2.69%	+2.11%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	11.62%	9.00%	+2.62%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	13.94%	11.89%	+2.05%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	16.89%	15.01%	+1.88%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	16.89%	15.01%	+1.88%

FOWF vs. QDPL - Expense Ratio Comparison

FOWF has a 0.49% expense ratio, which is lower than QDPL's 0.60% expense ratio.

Dividends

FOWF vs. QDPL - Dividend Comparison

FOWF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.73%, less than QDPL's 5.05% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
FOWF Pacer Solactive Whitney Future of Warfare ETF	0.73%	0.79%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
QDPL Pacer Metaurus US Large Cap Dividend Multiplier 400 ETF	5.05%	4.84%	5.43%	6.30%	7.27%	2.44%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FOWF and QDPL in my portfolio?

FOWF and QDPL have a correlation of 0.62, 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 QDPL?

FOWF has higher volatility (4.80%) compared to QDPL (2.69%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FOWF dropped -12.29% vs QDPL's -22.59%.

Which ETF is better, FOWF or QDPL?

On 1-year performance, QDPL leads with 26.37% vs 22.10% for FOWF. On fees, FOWF is cheaper at 0.49% per year. On volatility, QDPL has been the lower-risk option at 2.69%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FOWF or QDPL?

Over the 1-year period, QDPL has performed better with a 26.37% 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 QDPL?

FOWF is cheaper with a 0.49% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for QDPL.

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

QDPL has the higher dividend yield at 5.05%, compared with 0.73% for FOWF.

What is the main difference between FOWF and QDPL?

FOWF is categorized as Industrials Equities, while QDPL is Large Cap Blend Equities. Their fees differ too: 0.49% for FOWF and 0.60% for QDPL.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

QDPL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.23 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.