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

Performance

GCOW vs. ILCV - Performance Comparison

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

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, GCOW achieves a 12.18% return, which is significantly higher than ILCV's 7.75% return. Over the past 10 years, GCOW has underperformed ILCV with an annualized return of 9.91%, while ILCV has yielded a comparatively higher 11.68% annualized return.


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%

ILCV

1D
-0.44%
1M
2.76%
YTD
7.75%
6M
7.41%
1Y
26.58%
3Y*
18.61%
5Y*
11.42%
10Y*
11.68%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

GCOW vs. ILCV - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
GCOW
Pacer Global Cash Cows Dividend ETF
12.18%27.34%3.52%13.95%5.49%14.58%-4.33%17.81%-7.99%20.71%
ILCV
iShares Morningstar Value ETF
7.75%18.79%17.03%14.43%-7.02%26.71%-0.84%25.19%-6.24%15.00%

Correlation

The correlation between GCOW and ILCV is 0.55, 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

0.55

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

0.66

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

0.72

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.75

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 24, 2016

0.75

Over the past year, the correlation between GCOW and ILCV has dropped to 0.55 - well below their long-term average of 0.75, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

GCOW vs. ILCV - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
GCOW
ILCV

Energy

24.4%
6.0%

Consumer Defensive

17.1%
7.6%

Healthcare

14.6%
11.5%

Communication Services

14.6%
8.0%

Industrials

12.4%
8.8%

Basic Materials

7.3%
2.4%

Consumer Cyclical

4.6%
9.5%

Utilities

4.1%
3.5%

Technology

0.9%
23.8%

Financial Services

-

16.5%

Real Estate

-

2.0%

Energy

GCOW
24.4%
ILCV
6.0%

Consumer Defensive

GCOW
17.1%
ILCV
7.6%

Healthcare

GCOW
14.6%
ILCV
11.5%

Communication Services

GCOW
14.6%
ILCV
8.0%

Industrials

GCOW
12.4%
ILCV
8.8%

Basic Materials

GCOW
7.3%
ILCV
2.4%

Consumer Cyclical

GCOW
4.6%
ILCV
9.5%

Utilities

GCOW
4.1%
ILCV
3.5%

Technology

GCOW
0.9%
ILCV
23.8%

Financial Services

GCOW

-

ILCV
16.5%

Real Estate

GCOW

-

ILCV
2.0%

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. ILCV — Risk / Return Rank

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

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

ILCV
ILCV Risk / Return Rank: 8282
Overall Rank
ILCV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8282
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ILCV Sortino Ratio Rank: 8484
Sortino Ratio Rank
ILCV Omega Ratio Rank: 8181
Omega Ratio Rank
ILCV Calmar Ratio Rank: 7979
Calmar Ratio Rank
ILCV Martin Ratio Rank: 8383
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.

GCOW vs. ILCV - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Pacer Global Cash Cows Dividend ETF (GCOW) and iShares Morningstar Value ETF (ILCV). 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.


GCOWILCVDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.20

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.22

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.44

1.50

-0.06

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

5.71

4.08

+1.64

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

15.05

16.87

-1.82

GCOW vs. ILCV - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current GCOW Sharpe Ratio is 2.52, which is comparable to the ILCV Sharpe Ratio of 2.72. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of GCOW and ILCV, 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


GCOWILCVDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.52

2.72

-0.20

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.92

0.81

+0.11

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.61

0.70

-0.09

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.59

0.46

+0.13

Drawdowns

GCOW vs. ILCV - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GCOW drawdown since its inception was -37.64%, smaller than the maximum ILCV drawdown of -58.63%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GCOW and ILCV.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


GCOWILCVDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-37.64%

-58.63%

+20.99%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-4.77%

-6.55%

+1.78%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-12.35%

-14.95%

+2.60%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-21.48%

-18.58%

-2.90%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-37.64%

-35.53%

-2.11%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-2.73%

-0.60%

-2.13%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-5.84%

-9.32%

+3.48%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.81%

1.58%

+0.23%

Volatility

GCOW vs. ILCV - Volatility Comparison

Pacer Global Cash Cows Dividend ETF (GCOW) has a higher volatility of 2.85% compared to iShares Morningstar Value ETF (ILCV) at 2.01%. This indicates that GCOW's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than ILCV based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


GCOWILCVDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

2.85%

2.01%

+0.84%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

7.99%

6.97%

+1.02%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

10.81%

9.82%

+0.99%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

13.49%

14.21%

-0.72%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

16.20%

16.66%

-0.46%

GCOW vs. ILCV - Expense Ratio Comparison

GCOW has a 0.60% expense ratio, which is higher than ILCV's 0.04% expense ratio.


Dividends

GCOW vs. ILCV - Dividend Comparison

GCOW's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.43%, more than ILCV's 1.63% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
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%0.00%
ILCV
iShares Morningstar Value ETF
1.63%1.77%1.99%2.27%2.32%2.01%2.96%2.70%2.93%2.32%2.76%3.01%

Frequently Asked Questions


GCOW and ILCV have a correlation of 0.55, 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 ILCV (2.01%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GCOW dropped -37.64% vs ILCV's -58.63%.

On 10-year performance, ILCV leads with 11.68% vs 9.91% for GCOW. On fees, ILCV is cheaper at 0.04% per year. On volatility, ILCV has been the lower-risk option at 2.01%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, ILCV has performed better with a 11.68% return vs 9.91%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

ILCV is cheaper with a 0.04% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for GCOW.

GCOW has the higher dividend yield at 4.43%, compared with 1.63% for ILCV.

GCOW tracks Pacer Global Cash Cows Dividends Index, while ILCV tracks Morningstar US Large-Mid Cap Broad Value Index. They also come from different issuers: Pacer and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.60% for GCOW and 0.04% for ILCV.

ILCV currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.72 vs 2.52), 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 GCOW and ILCV

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