PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
IWN vs. COWZ
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

IWN vs. COWZ

Last updated Jun 14, 2026

IWN (iShares Russell 2000 Value ETF) and COWZ (Pacer US Cash Cows 100 ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - IWN is a Small Cap Value Equities fund tracking the Russell 2000 Value 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, IWN returned 6.89%/yr vs 10.13%/yr for COWZ. Their correlation of 0.84 suggests significant overlap in exposure. IWN charges 0.24%/yr vs 0.49%/yr for COWZ.

Performance

IWN vs. COWZ - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares Russell 2000 Value ETF (IWN) 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, IWN achieves a 20.82% return, which is significantly higher than COWZ's 6.93% return.

IWN

1D
1.17%
1M
3.98%
YTD
20.82%
6M
17.48%
1Y
44.79%
3Y*
17.41%
5Y*
6.89%
10Y*
10.58%

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)

IWN vs. COWZ - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
IWN
iShares Russell 2000 Value ETF		20.82%12.40%7.63%14.56%-14.77%27.96%4.66%22.01%-13.01%7.69%
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 IWN and COWZ is 0.68, 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

0.68

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

0.80

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

0.84

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 19, 2016

0.84

The correlation between IWN and COWZ shifts across timeframes, from 0.68 (1 year) to 0.84 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

IWN vs. COWZ - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
IWN
COWZ

Financial Services

23.9%

-

Industrials

12.1%
8.4%

Technology

11.6%
16.0%

Real Estate

10.2%

-

Healthcare

10.1%
21.8%

Consumer Cyclical

8.9%
11.7%

Energy

7.9%
16.9%

Basic Materials

5.4%
3.7%

Utilities

5.1%

-

Communication Services

2.7%
10.4%

Consumer Defensive

2.1%
10.9%

Financial Services

IWN
23.9%
COWZ

-

Industrials

IWN
12.1%
COWZ
8.4%

Technology

IWN
11.6%
COWZ
16.0%

Real Estate

IWN
10.2%
COWZ

-

Healthcare

IWN
10.1%
COWZ
21.8%

Consumer Cyclical

IWN
8.9%
COWZ
11.7%

Energy

IWN
7.9%
COWZ
16.9%

Basic Materials

IWN
5.4%
COWZ
3.7%

Utilities

IWN
5.1%
COWZ

-

Communication Services

IWN
2.7%
COWZ
10.4%

Consumer Defensive

IWN
2.1%
COWZ
10.9%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.

iShares Russell 2000 Value ETF

Pacer US Cash Cows 100 ETF

Often compared with IWN:
IWN vs. IWMIWN vs. IWOIWN vs. VTWOIWN vs. IJSIWN vs. IWSIWN vs. IWVIWN vs. IWX
Often compared with COWZ:
COWZ vs. VOOCOWZ vs. VFLOCOWZ vs. SCHDCOWZ vs. GCOWCOWZ vs. COWGCOWZ vs. CALFCOWZ vs. VOOV

Return for Risk

IWN vs. COWZ — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
IWN
IWN Risk / Return Rank: 8585
Overall Rank
IWN Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8484
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IWN Sortino Ratio Rank: 8484
Sortino Ratio Rank
IWN Omega Ratio Rank: 7878
Omega Ratio Rank
IWN Calmar Ratio Rank: 9191
Calmar Ratio Rank
IWN Martin Ratio Rank: 8888
Martin Ratio Rank
COWZ
COWZ Risk / Return Rank: 6262
Overall Rank
COWZ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5555
Sharpe Ratio Rank
COWZ Sortino Ratio Rank: 5959
Sortino Ratio Rank
COWZ Omega Ratio Rank: 5252
Omega Ratio Rank
COWZ Calmar Ratio Rank: 8080
Calmar Ratio Rank
COWZ Martin Ratio Rank: 6262
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.

IWN vs. COWZ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Russell 2000 Value ETF (IWN) 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.

IWNCOWZDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
2.35
1.63

+0.72

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
3.27
2.42

+0.85

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.40

1.29

+0.11

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

5.02

3.65

+1.38

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

16.91

9.73

+7.18

IWN vs. COWZ - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IWN Sharpe Ratio is 2.35, which is higher than the COWZ Sharpe Ratio of 1.63. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IWN 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...

Drawdowns

IWN vs. COWZ - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IWN drawdown since its inception was -61.55%, which is greater than COWZ's maximum drawdown of -38.63%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IWN and COWZ.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

IWNCOWZDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-61.55%

-38.63%

-22.92%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-8.45%

-5.00%

-3.45%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-26.70%

-22.00%

-4.70%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-26.70%

-22.00%

-4.70%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-46.08%

—

—

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

0.00%

-2.05%

+2.05%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-10.15%

-4.80%

-5.35%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.51%

1.88%

+0.63%

Volatility

IWN vs. COWZ - Volatility Comparison

iShares Russell 2000 Value ETF (IWN) has a higher volatility of 5.80% compared to Pacer US Cash Cows 100 ETF (COWZ) at 3.27%. This indicates that IWN'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.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

IWNCOWZDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

5.80%

3.27%

+2.53%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

12.25%

7.20%

+5.05%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

18.09%

11.19%

+6.90%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

21.47%

17.64%

+3.83%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

23.41%

19.91%

+3.50%

IWN vs. COWZ - Expense Ratio Comparison

IWN has a 0.24% expense ratio, which is lower than COWZ's 0.49% expense ratio.

Dividends

IWN vs. COWZ - Dividend Comparison

IWN's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.42%, less than COWZ's 1.93% yield.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
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%
IWN
iShares Russell 2000 Value ETF		1.42%1.70%1.80%2.04%2.12%1.48%1.60%1.92%1.99%1.78%1.74%2.15%

Frequently Asked Questions

IWN and COWZ have a correlation of 0.68, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

IWN has higher volatility (5.80%) compared to COWZ (3.27%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IWN dropped -61.55% vs COWZ's -38.63%.

On 5-year performance, COWZ leads with 10.13% vs 6.89% for IWN. On fees, IWN is cheaper at 0.24% 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.

Over the 5-year period, COWZ has performed better with a 10.13% return vs 6.89%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

IWN is cheaper with a 0.24% expense ratio, compared with 0.49% for COWZ.

COWZ has the higher dividend yield at 1.93%, compared with 1.42% for IWN.

IWN is categorized as Small Cap Value Equities, while COWZ is Mid Cap Value Equities. IWN tracks Russell 2000 Value Index, while COWZ tracks Pacer US Cash Cows 100 Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Pacer. Their fees differ too: 0.24% for IWN and 0.49% for COWZ.

IWN currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.35 vs 1.63), 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 IWN 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