GFLW vs. GCOW

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

GFLW (VictoryShares Free Cash Flow Growth ETF) and GCOW (Pacer Global Cash Cows Dividend ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - GFLW is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund tracking the Victory Free Cash Flow Growth Index, while GCOW is a Large Cap Value Equities fund tracking the Pacer Global Cash Cows Dividends Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, GFLW returned 29.44% vs 27.12% for GCOW. At a 0.18 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. GFLW charges 0.39%/yr vs 0.60%/yr for GCOW.

Performance

GFLW vs. GCOW - Performance Comparison

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, GFLW achieves a 16.55% return, which is significantly higher than GCOW's 12.18% return.

GFLW

• 1D: -0.19%
• 1M: 10.36%
• YTD: 16.55%
• 6M: 15.42%
• 1Y: 29.44%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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%

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

GFLW vs. GCOW - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
GFLW VictoryShares Free Cash Flow Growth ETF	16.55%	18.40%	-6.12%
GCOW Pacer Global Cash Cows Dividend ETF	12.18%	27.34%	-2.72%

Correlation

The correlation between GFLW and GCOW is 0.13, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.13
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 5, 2024	0.18

Return for Risk

GFLW vs. GCOW — Risk / Return Rank

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

GFLW

GFLW Risk / Return Rank: 42
GFLW Sharpe Ratio Rank: 44
GFLW Sortino Ratio Rank: 42
GFLW Omega Ratio Rank: 41
GFLW Calmar Ratio Rank: 41
GFLW Martin Ratio Rank: 42

GCOW

GCOW Risk / Return Rank: 79
GCOW Sharpe Ratio Rank: 76
GCOW Sortino Ratio Rank: 79
GCOW Omega Ratio Rank: 72
GCOW Calmar Ratio Rank: 90
GCOW Martin Ratio Rank: 77

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.

GFLW vs. GCOW - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for VictoryShares Free Cash Flow Growth ETF (GFLW) and Pacer Global Cash Cows Dividend ETF (GCOW). 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.

	GFLW	GCOW	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.53	2.52	-0.99
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.12	3.63	-1.51
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.26	1.44	-0.17
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.98	5.71	-3.73
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	6.72	15.05	-8.33
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

GFLW vs. GCOW - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current GFLW Sharpe Ratio is 1.53, which is lower than the GCOW Sharpe Ratio of 2.52. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of GFLW and GCOW, 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

	GFLW	GCOW	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.53	2.52	-0.99
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	0.78	0.59	+0.19

Drawdowns

GFLW vs. GCOW - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GFLW drawdown since its inception was -24.14%, smaller than the maximum GCOW drawdown of -37.64%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GFLW and GCOW.

Drawdown Indicators

	GFLW	GCOW	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-24.14%	-37.64%	+13.50%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-14.95%	-4.77%	-10.18%
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 Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.19%	-2.73%	+2.54%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-4.64%	-5.84%	+1.20%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.39%	1.81%	+2.58%

Volatility

GFLW vs. GCOW - Volatility Comparison

VictoryShares Free Cash Flow Growth ETF (GFLW) has a higher volatility of 5.44% compared to Pacer Global Cash Cows Dividend ETF (GCOW) at 2.85%. This indicates that GFLW's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than GCOW based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	GFLW	GCOW	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.44%	2.85%	+2.59%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	14.94%	7.99%	+6.95%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	19.30%	10.81%	+8.49%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	24.57%	13.49%	+11.08%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	24.57%	16.20%	+8.37%

GFLW vs. GCOW - Expense Ratio Comparison

GFLW has a 0.39% expense ratio, which is lower than GCOW's 0.60% expense ratio.

Dividends

GFLW vs. GCOW - Dividend Comparison

GFLW's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.01%, less than GCOW's 4.43% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016
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%
GFLW VictoryShares Free Cash Flow Growth ETF	0.01%	0.02%	0.01%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both GFLW and GCOW in my portfolio?

GFLW and GCOW have a correlation of 0.13, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, GFLW or GCOW?

GFLW has higher volatility (5.44%) compared to GCOW (2.85%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GFLW dropped -24.14% vs GCOW's -37.64%.

Which ETF is better, GFLW or GCOW?

On 1-year performance, GFLW leads with 29.44% vs 27.12% for GCOW. On fees, GFLW is cheaper at 0.39% per year. On volatility, GCOW has been the lower-risk option at 2.85%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, GFLW or GCOW?

Over the 1-year period, GFLW has performed better with a 29.44% return vs 27.12%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, GFLW or GCOW?

GFLW is cheaper with a 0.39% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for GCOW.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, GFLW or GCOW?

GCOW has the higher dividend yield at 4.43%, compared with 0.01% for GFLW.

What is the main difference between GFLW and GCOW?

GFLW is categorized as Large Cap Growth Equities, while GCOW is Large Cap Value Equities. GFLW tracks Victory Free Cash Flow Growth Index, while GCOW tracks Pacer Global Cash Cows Dividends Index. They also come from different issuers: Victory and Pacer. Their fees differ too: 0.39% for GFLW and 0.60% for GCOW.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

GCOW currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.52 vs 1.53), 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.