IMCG vs. COWZ

Last updated Jun 14, 2026

IMCG (iShares Morningstar Mid-Cap Growth ETF) and COWZ (Pacer US Cash Cows 100 ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - IMCG is a Mid Cap Growth Equities fund tracking the Morningstar US Mid Cap Broad Growth Index, while COWZ is a Mid Cap Value Equities fund tracking the Pacer US Cash Cows 100 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, IMCG returned 7.95%/yr vs 10.13%/yr for COWZ. A 0.71 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. IMCG charges 0.06%/yr vs 0.49%/yr for COWZ.

Performance

IMCG vs. COWZ - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares Morningstar Mid-Cap Growth ETF (IMCG) and Pacer US Cash Cows 100 ETF (COWZ). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, IMCG achieves a 18.63% return, which is significantly higher than COWZ's 6.93% return.

IMCG

• 1D: 0.83%
• 1M: 4.21%
• YTD: 18.63%
• 6M: 17.29%
• 1Y: 23.54%
• 3Y*: 17.50%
• 5Y*: 7.95%
• 10Y*: 14.48%

COWZ

• 1D: 0.82%
• 1M: 1.75%
• YTD: 6.93%
• 6M: 6.01%
• 1Y: 19.20%
• 3Y*: 13.01%
• 5Y*: 10.13%
• 10Y*: —

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

IMCG vs. COWZ - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
IMCG iShares Morningstar Mid-Cap Growth ETF	18.63%	6.55%	18.14%	20.73%	-25.79%	15.39%	45.64%	35.70%	-3.68%	25.57%
COWZ Pacer US Cash Cows 100 ETF	6.93%	8.98%	10.64%	14.73%	0.19%	42.57%	11.65%	23.41%	-10.05%	20.22%

Correlation

The correlation between IMCG and COWZ is 0.62, 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	0.62
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.71
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.75
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 19, 2016	0.71

The correlation between IMCG and COWZ shifts across timeframes, from 0.62 (1 year) to 0.75 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

IMCG vs. COWZ - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	IMCG	COWZ
Technology	34.9%	16.0%
Industrials	25.3%	8.4%
Consumer Cyclical	9.1%	11.7%
Financial Services	8.6%	-
Healthcare	6.9%	21.8%
Basic Materials	4.3%	3.7%
Real Estate	3.1%	-
Utilities	2.5%	-
Communication Services	2.4%	10.4%
Energy	1.7%	16.9%
Consumer Defensive	1.2%	10.9%

Return for Risk

IMCG vs. COWZ — Risk / Return Rank

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

IMCG

IMCG Risk / Return Rank: 46
IMCG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 43
IMCG Sortino Ratio Rank: 42
IMCG Omega Ratio Rank: 41
IMCG Calmar Ratio Rank: 49
IMCG Martin Ratio Rank: 54

COWZ

COWZ Risk / Return Rank: 62
COWZ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 55
COWZ Sortino Ratio Rank: 59
COWZ Omega Ratio Rank: 52
COWZ Calmar Ratio Rank: 80
COWZ Martin Ratio Rank: 62

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.

IMCG vs. COWZ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Morningstar Mid-Cap Growth ETF (IMCG) and Pacer US Cash Cows 100 ETF (COWZ). 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.

Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.

	IMCG	COWZ	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.33	1.63	-0.30
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.90	2.42	-0.52
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.24	1.29	-0.05
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.16	3.65	-1.49
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	8.22	9.73	-1.51

IMCG vs. COWZ - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IMCG Sharpe Ratio is 1.33, which is comparable to the COWZ Sharpe Ratio of 1.63. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IMCG and COWZ, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

IMCG vs. COWZ - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IMCG drawdown since its inception was -58.96%, which is greater than COWZ's maximum drawdown of -38.63%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IMCG and COWZ.

Drawdown Indicators

	IMCG	COWZ	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-58.96%	-38.63%	-20.33%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-10.17%	-5.00%	-5.17%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-21.92%	-22.00%	+0.08%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-35.08%	-22.00%	-13.08%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-35.08%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.66%	-2.05%	+0.39%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-9.21%	-4.80%	-4.41%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.66%	1.88%	+0.78%

Volatility

IMCG vs. COWZ - Volatility Comparison

iShares Morningstar Mid-Cap Growth ETF (IMCG) has a higher volatility of 7.07% compared to Pacer US Cash Cows 100 ETF (COWZ) at 3.27%. This indicates that IMCG's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than COWZ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	IMCG	COWZ	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	7.07%	3.27%	+3.80%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	13.73%	7.20%	+6.53%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	16.49%	11.19%	+5.30%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	20.31%	17.64%	+2.67%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	20.58%	19.91%	+0.67%

IMCG vs. COWZ - Expense Ratio Comparison

IMCG has a 0.06% expense ratio, which is lower than COWZ's 0.49% expense ratio.

Dividends

IMCG vs. COWZ - Dividend Comparison

IMCG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.66%, less than COWZ's 1.93% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
COWZ Pacer US Cash Cows 100 ETF	1.93%	2.19%	1.82%	1.92%	1.96%	1.48%	2.54%	1.96%	1.67%	1.95%	0.13%	0.00%
IMCG iShares Morningstar Mid-Cap Growth ETF	0.66%	0.78%	0.78%	0.85%	0.91%	0.41%	0.09%	0.30%	0.35%	0.45%	0.52%	0.38%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both IMCG and COWZ in my portfolio?

IMCG and COWZ have a correlation of 0.62, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, IMCG or COWZ?

IMCG has higher volatility (7.07%) compared to COWZ (3.27%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IMCG dropped -58.96% vs COWZ's -38.63%.

Which ETF is better, IMCG or COWZ?

On 5-year performance, COWZ leads with 10.13% vs 7.95% for IMCG. On fees, IMCG is cheaper at 0.06% per year. On volatility, COWZ has been the lower-risk option at 3.27%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, IMCG or COWZ?

Over the 5-year period, COWZ has performed better with a 10.13% return vs 7.95%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, IMCG or COWZ?

IMCG is cheaper with a 0.06% expense ratio, compared with 0.49% for COWZ.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, IMCG or COWZ?

COWZ has the higher dividend yield at 1.93%, compared with 0.66% for IMCG.

What is the main difference between IMCG and COWZ?

IMCG is categorized as Mid Cap Growth Equities, while COWZ is Mid Cap Value Equities. IMCG tracks Morningstar US Mid Cap Broad Growth Index, while COWZ tracks Pacer US Cash Cows 100 Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Pacer. Their fees differ too: 0.06% for IMCG and 0.49% for COWZ.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

COWZ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.63 vs 1.33), 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.