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

Performance

GCOW vs. QDPL - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Pacer Global Cash Cows Dividend ETF (GCOW) and Pacer Metaurus US Large Cap Dividend Multiplier 400 ETF (QDPL). 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 QDPL's 10.40% 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%

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)

GCOW vs. QDPL - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024202320222021
GCOW
Pacer Global Cash Cows Dividend ETF
12.18%27.34%3.52%13.95%5.49%2.62%
QDPL
Pacer Metaurus US Large Cap Dividend Multiplier 400 ETF
10.40%16.52%22.83%23.66%-16.25%8.32%

Correlation

The correlation between GCOW and QDPL is 0.31, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.31

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

0.43

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 14, 2021

0.54

Over the past year, the correlation between GCOW and QDPL has dropped to 0.31 - well below their long-term average of 0.54, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

GCOW vs. QDPL - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
GCOW
QDPL

Energy

24.4%
2.4%

Consumer Defensive

17.1%
4.0%

Healthcare

14.6%
7.6%

Communication Services

14.6%
8.5%

Industrials

12.4%
6.3%

Basic Materials

7.3%
1.4%

Consumer Cyclical

4.6%
8.4%

Utilities

4.1%
2.1%

Technology

0.9%
27.6%

Financial Services

-

10.3%

Real Estate

-

1.5%

Energy

GCOW
24.4%
QDPL
2.4%

Consumer Defensive

GCOW
17.1%
QDPL
4.0%

Healthcare

GCOW
14.6%
QDPL
7.6%

Communication Services

GCOW
14.6%
QDPL
8.5%

Industrials

GCOW
12.4%
QDPL
6.3%

Basic Materials

GCOW
7.3%
QDPL
1.4%

Consumer Cyclical

GCOW
4.6%
QDPL
8.4%

Utilities

GCOW
4.1%
QDPL
2.1%

Technology

GCOW
0.9%
QDPL
27.6%

Financial Services

GCOW

-

QDPL
10.3%

Real Estate

GCOW

-

QDPL
1.5%

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. QDPL — 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

QDPL
QDPL Risk / Return Rank: 6767
Overall Rank
QDPL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6666
Sharpe Ratio Rank
QDPL Sortino Ratio Rank: 6666
Sortino Ratio Rank
QDPL Omega Ratio Rank: 6666
Omega Ratio Rank
QDPL Calmar Ratio Rank: 6161
Calmar Ratio Rank
QDPL Martin Ratio Rank: 7575
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. QDPL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

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


GCOWQDPLDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.29

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.52

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.44

1.41

+0.03

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

5.71

3.06

+2.65

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

15.05

14.37

+0.67

GCOW vs. QDPL - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current GCOW Sharpe Ratio is 2.52, which is comparable to the QDPL Sharpe Ratio of 2.23. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of GCOW 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.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


GCOWQDPLDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.52

2.23

+0.29

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

0.83

-0.24

Drawdowns

GCOW vs. QDPL - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GCOW drawdown since its inception was -37.64%, which is greater than QDPL's maximum drawdown of -22.59%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GCOW and QDPL.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


GCOWQDPLDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-37.64%

-22.59%

-15.05%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-4.77%

-8.65%

+3.88%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-12.35%

-17.75%

+5.40%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-21.48%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-37.64%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-2.73%

-0.65%

-2.08%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-5.84%

-5.14%

-0.70%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.81%

1.84%

-0.03%

Volatility

GCOW vs. QDPL - Volatility Comparison

Pacer Global Cash Cows Dividend ETF (GCOW) has a higher volatility of 2.85% compared to Pacer Metaurus US Large Cap Dividend Multiplier 400 ETF (QDPL) at 2.69%. This indicates that GCOW'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.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


GCOWQDPLDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

2.85%

2.69%

+0.16%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

7.99%

9.00%

-1.01%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

10.81%

11.89%

-1.08%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

13.49%

15.01%

-1.52%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

16.20%

15.01%

+1.19%

GCOW vs. QDPL - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both GCOW and QDPL have an expense ratio of 0.60%.


Dividends

GCOW vs. QDPL - Dividend Comparison

GCOW's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.43%, less than QDPL's 5.05% yield.


PositionTTM2025202420232022202120202019201820172016
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%
QDPL
Pacer Metaurus US Large Cap Dividend Multiplier 400 ETF
5.05%4.84%5.43%6.30%7.27%2.44%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


GCOW and QDPL have a correlation of 0.31, 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 QDPL (2.69%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GCOW dropped -37.64% vs QDPL's -22.59%.

On 3-year performance, QDPL leads with 20.64% vs 17.41% for GCOW. Both ETFs have the same 0.60% expense ratio. 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.

Over the 3-year period, QDPL has performed better with a 20.64% return vs 17.41%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

GCOW and QDPL have the same expense ratio: 0.60% per year.

QDPL has the higher dividend yield at 5.05%, compared with 4.43% for GCOW.

GCOW is categorized as Large Cap Value Equities, while QDPL is Large Cap Blend Equities.

GCOW currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.52 vs 2.23), 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 QDPL

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