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

Performance

ILCV vs. GCOW - Performance Comparison

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

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

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


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%

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)

ILCV vs. GCOW - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
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%
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%

Correlation

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

ILCV vs. GCOW - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
ILCV
GCOW

Technology

23.8%
0.9%

Financial Services

16.5%

-

Healthcare

11.5%
14.6%

Consumer Cyclical

9.5%
4.6%

Industrials

8.8%
12.4%

Communication Services

8.0%
14.6%

Consumer Defensive

7.6%
17.1%

Energy

6.0%
24.4%

Utilities

3.5%
4.1%

Basic Materials

2.4%
7.3%

Real Estate

2.0%

-

Technology

ILCV
23.8%
GCOW
0.9%

Financial Services

ILCV
16.5%
GCOW

-

Healthcare

ILCV
11.5%
GCOW
14.6%

Consumer Cyclical

ILCV
9.5%
GCOW
4.6%

Industrials

ILCV
8.8%
GCOW
12.4%

Communication Services

ILCV
8.0%
GCOW
14.6%

Consumer Defensive

ILCV
7.6%
GCOW
17.1%

Energy

ILCV
6.0%
GCOW
24.4%

Utilities

ILCV
3.5%
GCOW
4.1%

Basic Materials

ILCV
2.4%
GCOW
7.3%

Real Estate

ILCV
2.0%
GCOW

-

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

ILCV vs. GCOW — Risk / Return Rank

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

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

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
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.

ILCV vs. GCOW - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Morningstar Value ETF (ILCV) 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.


ILCVGCOWDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.20

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.22

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.50

1.44

+0.06

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

4.08

5.71

-1.64

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

16.87

15.05

+1.82

ILCV vs. GCOW - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

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


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


ILCVGCOWDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.72

2.52

+0.20

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.81

0.92

-0.11

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.70

0.61

+0.09

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.46

0.59

-0.13

Drawdowns

ILCV vs. GCOW - Drawdown Comparison

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


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


ILCVGCOWDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-58.63%

-37.64%

-20.99%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-6.55%

-4.77%

-1.78%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-14.95%

-12.35%

-2.60%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-18.58%

-21.48%

+2.90%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-35.53%

-37.64%

+2.11%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.60%

-2.73%

+2.13%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-9.32%

-5.84%

-3.48%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.58%

1.81%

-0.23%

Volatility

ILCV vs. GCOW - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares Morningstar Value ETF (ILCV) is 2.01%, while Pacer Global Cash Cows Dividend ETF (GCOW) has a volatility of 2.85%. This indicates that ILCV experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than GCOW based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


ILCVGCOWDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

2.01%

2.85%

-0.84%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

6.97%

7.99%

-1.02%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

9.82%

10.81%

-0.99%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

14.21%

13.49%

+0.72%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

16.66%

16.20%

+0.46%

ILCV vs. GCOW - Expense Ratio Comparison

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


Dividends

ILCV vs. GCOW - Dividend Comparison

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


ILCV and GCOW 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, ILCV dropped -58.63% vs GCOW's -37.64%.

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.

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

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 ILCV and GCOW

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