PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
IMCV vs. COWZ
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

IMCV vs. COWZ - Performance Comparison

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

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, IMCV achieves a 9.96% return, which is significantly higher than COWZ's 8.18% return.


IMCV

1D
-0.21%
1M
2.12%
YTD
9.96%
6M
11.32%
1Y
23.41%
3Y*
16.66%
5Y*
8.69%
10Y*
10.40%

COWZ

1D
-0.34%
1M
2.61%
YTD
8.18%
6M
9.03%
1Y
22.23%
3Y*
14.44%
5Y*
10.57%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

IMCV vs. COWZ - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
IMCV
iShares Morningstar Mid-Cap ETF
9.96%13.52%12.28%11.89%-6.98%33.56%-4.11%24.72%-10.93%12.60%
COWZ
Pacer US Cash Cows 100 ETF
8.18%8.98%10.64%14.73%0.19%42.57%11.65%23.41%-10.05%20.22%

Correlation

The correlation between IMCV and COWZ is 0.84, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.


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

0.84

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

0.87

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

0.90

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 20, 2016

0.89

The correlation between IMCV and COWZ has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.84 to 0.90 - a consistent structural relationship.

IMCV vs. COWZ - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
IMCV
COWZ

Financial Services

15.6%

-

Energy

12.5%
16.9%

Industrials

12.1%
8.4%

Utilities

10.0%

-

Technology

9.1%
16.0%

Consumer Defensive

8.9%
10.9%

Consumer Cyclical

8.7%
11.7%

Healthcare

8.5%
21.8%

Basic Materials

6.5%
3.7%

Real Estate

5.6%

-

Communication Services

2.5%
10.4%

Financial Services

IMCV
15.6%
COWZ

-

Energy

IMCV
12.5%
COWZ
16.9%

Industrials

IMCV
12.1%
COWZ
8.4%

Utilities

IMCV
10.0%
COWZ

-

Technology

IMCV
9.1%
COWZ
16.0%

Consumer Defensive

IMCV
8.9%
COWZ
10.9%

Consumer Cyclical

IMCV
8.7%
COWZ
11.7%

Healthcare

IMCV
8.5%
COWZ
21.8%

Basic Materials

IMCV
6.5%
COWZ
3.7%

Real Estate

IMCV
5.6%
COWZ

-

Communication Services

IMCV
2.5%
COWZ
10.4%

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

IMCV vs. COWZ — Risk / Return Rank

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

IMCV
IMCV Risk / Return Rank: 6363
Overall Rank
IMCV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5959
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IMCV Sortino Ratio Rank: 6262
Sortino Ratio Rank
IMCV Omega Ratio Rank: 5858
Omega Ratio Rank
IMCV Calmar Ratio Rank: 6868
Calmar Ratio Rank
IMCV Martin Ratio Rank: 6969
Martin Ratio Rank

COWZ
COWZ Risk / Return Rank: 6565
Overall Rank
COWZ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5959
Sharpe Ratio Rank
COWZ Sortino Ratio Rank: 6262
Sortino Ratio Rank
COWZ Omega Ratio Rank: 5757
Omega Ratio Rank
COWZ Calmar Ratio Rank: 8383
Calmar Ratio Rank
COWZ Martin Ratio Rank: 6565
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.

IMCV vs. COWZ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Morningstar Mid-Cap ETF (IMCV) 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.


IMCVCOWZDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.01

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.04

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.36

1.36

0.00

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.41

4.46

-1.06

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

12.72

12.19

+0.52

IMCV vs. COWZ - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IMCV Sharpe Ratio is 2.02, which is comparable to the COWZ Sharpe Ratio of 2.02. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IMCV 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.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


IMCVCOWZDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.02

2.02

+0.01

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.53

0.60

-0.08

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.53

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.47

0.65

-0.17

Drawdowns

IMCV vs. COWZ - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IMCV drawdown since its inception was -64.74%, which is greater than COWZ's maximum drawdown of -38.63%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IMCV and COWZ.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


IMCVCOWZDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-64.74%

-38.63%

-26.11%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-6.90%

-5.00%

-1.90%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-18.63%

-22.00%

+3.37%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-19.87%

-22.00%

+2.13%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-46.33%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.21%

-0.91%

+0.70%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-8.42%

-4.81%

-3.61%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.85%

1.83%

+0.02%

Volatility

IMCV vs. COWZ - Volatility Comparison

iShares Morningstar Mid-Cap ETF (IMCV) and Pacer US Cash Cows 100 ETF (COWZ) have volatilities of 2.56% and 2.56%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


IMCVCOWZDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

2.56%

2.56%

0.00%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

8.00%

7.12%

+0.88%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

11.63%

11.13%

+0.50%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

16.63%

17.63%

-1.00%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

19.66%

19.93%

-0.27%

IMCV vs. COWZ - Expense Ratio Comparison

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


Dividends

IMCV vs. COWZ - Dividend Comparison

IMCV's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.94%, less than COWZ's 1.99% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
COWZ
Pacer US Cash Cows 100 ETF
1.99%2.19%1.82%1.92%1.96%1.48%2.54%1.96%1.67%1.95%0.13%0.00%
IMCV
iShares Morningstar Mid-Cap ETF
1.94%2.23%2.36%2.30%2.36%1.86%2.61%2.45%2.61%1.87%2.09%2.29%

Frequently Asked Questions


IMCV and COWZ have a correlation of 0.84, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

COWZ has higher volatility (2.56%) compared to IMCV (2.56%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IMCV dropped -64.74% vs COWZ's -38.63%.

On 5-year performance, COWZ leads with 10.57% vs 8.69% for IMCV. On fees, IMCV is cheaper at 0.06% per year. Their volatility is very similar. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 5-year period, COWZ has performed better with a 10.57% return vs 8.69%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

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

COWZ has the higher dividend yield at 1.99%, compared with 1.94% for IMCV.

IMCV tracks Morningstar US Mid Cap Broad Value 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 IMCV and 0.49% for COWZ.

IMCV currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.02 vs 2.02), 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 IMCV and COWZ

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