GCOW vs. ACLO
GCOW (Pacer Global Cash Cows Dividend ETF) and ACLO (TCW AAA CLO ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - GCOW is a Large Cap Value Equities fund tracking the Pacer Global Cash Cows Dividends Index, while ACLO is a CLO fund actively managed by TCW. GCOW is passively managed, while ACLO is actively managed. Over the past year, GCOW returned 27.54% vs 5.29% for ACLO. At a correlation of -0.06, they often move in opposite directions. GCOW charges 0.60%/yr vs 0.20%/yr for ACLO.
Performance
GCOW vs. ACLO - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, GCOW achieves a 12.25% return, which is significantly higher than ACLO's 2.20% return.
GCOW
- 1D
- 0.06%
- 1M
- -0.57%
- YTD
- 12.25%
- 6M
- 13.50%
- 1Y
- 27.54%
- 3Y*
- 17.57%
- 5Y*
- 12.36%
- 10Y*
- 9.81%
ACLO
- 1D
- -0.01%
- 1M
- 0.42%
- YTD
- 2.20%
- 6M
- 2.59%
- 1Y
- 5.29%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
GCOW vs. ACLO - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | |
|---|---|---|---|
GCOW Pacer Global Cash Cows Dividend ETF | 12.25% | 27.34% | -2.22% |
ACLO TCW AAA CLO ETF | 2.20% | 5.32% | 0.81% |
Correlation
The correlation between GCOW and ACLO is -0.11, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | -0.11 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 19, 2024 | -0.06 |
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
GCOW vs. ACLO — Risk / Return Rank
GCOW
ACLO
GCOW vs. ACLO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Pacer Global Cash Cows Dividend ETF (GCOW) and TCW AAA CLO ETF (ACLO). 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.
| GCOW | ACLO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -4.70 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -11.11 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.45 | 3.39 | -1.94 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 5.80 | 19.82 | -14.02 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 15.21 | 165.22 | -150.01 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| GCOW | ACLO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.56 | 7.26 | -4.70 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.92 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.61 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.59 | 5.09 | -4.50 |
Drawdowns
GCOW vs. ACLO - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum GCOW drawdown since its inception was -37.64%, which is greater than ACLO's maximum drawdown of -1.01%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GCOW and ACLO.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| GCOW | ACLO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -37.64% | -1.01% | -36.63% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -4.77% | -0.27% | -4.50% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -12.35% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -21.48% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -37.64% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -2.67% | -0.01% | -2.66% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -5.84% | -0.05% | -5.79% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.81% | 0.03% | +1.78% |
Volatility
GCOW vs. ACLO - Volatility Comparison
Pacer Global Cash Cows Dividend ETF (GCOW) has a higher volatility of 2.75% compared to TCW AAA CLO ETF (ACLO) at 0.14%. This indicates that GCOW's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than ACLO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| GCOW | ACLO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 2.75% | 0.14% | +2.61% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 7.99% | 0.57% | +7.42% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 10.80% | 0.73% | +10.07% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 13.48% | 1.08% | +12.40% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 16.20% | 1.08% | +15.12% |
GCOW vs. ACLO - Expense Ratio Comparison
GCOW has a 0.60% expense ratio, which is higher than ACLO's 0.20% expense ratio.
Dividends
GCOW vs. ACLO - Dividend Comparison
GCOW's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.39%, more than ACLO's 4.91% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ACLO TCW AAA CLO ETF | 4.91% | 4.87% | 0.59% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
GCOW Pacer Global Cash Cows Dividend ETF | 5.39% | 4.06% | 5.14% | 5.28% | 4.39% | 4.23% | 4.12% | 4.40% | 3.94% | 2.79% | 1.95% |
Frequently Asked Questions
GCOW and ACLO have a correlation of -0.11, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
GCOW has higher volatility (2.75%) compared to ACLO (0.14%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GCOW dropped -37.64% vs ACLO's -1.01%.
On 1-year performance, GCOW leads with 27.54% vs 5.29% for ACLO. On fees, ACLO is cheaper at 0.20% per year. On volatility, ACLO has been the lower-risk option at 0.14%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, GCOW has performed better with a 27.54% return vs 5.29%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
ACLO is cheaper with a 0.20% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for GCOW.
GCOW has the higher dividend yield at 5.39%, compared with 4.91% for ACLO.
GCOW is categorized as Large Cap Value Equities, while ACLO is CLO. They also come from different issuers: Pacer and TCW. Their fees differ too: 0.60% for GCOW and 0.20% for ACLO.
ACLO currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (7.26 vs 2.56), 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.
Find the right allocation for GCOW and ACLO
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