PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
IWX vs. GCOW
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

IWX vs. GCOW

Last updated Aug 4, 2026
Documentation

IWX (iShares Russell Top 200 Value ETF) and GCOW (Pacer Global Cash Cows Dividend ETF) are both Large Cap Value Equities funds - IWX tracks the Russell Top 200 Value Index while GCOW tracks the Pacer Global Cash Cows Dividends Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, IWX returned 12.05%/yr vs 9.81%/yr for GCOW. Their 0.75 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. IWX charges 0.20%/yr vs 0.60%/yr for GCOW.

Performance

IWX vs. GCOW - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares Russell Top 200 Value ETF (IWX) 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, IWX achieves a 22.04% return, which is significantly higher than GCOW's 14.53% return. Over the past 10 years, IWX has outperformed GCOW with an annualized return of 12.05%, while GCOW has yielded a comparatively lower 9.81% annualized return.

IWX

1D
0.94%
1M
3.56%
6M
15.64%
YTD
22.04%
1Y
36.20%
3Y*
19.92%
5Y*
12.91%
10Y*
12.05%
ALL TIME*
11.75%

GCOW

1D
-0.22%
1M
5.25%
6M
6.56%
YTD
14.53%
1Y
27.49%
3Y*
16.49%
5Y*
13.25%
10Y*
9.81%
ALL TIME*
10.54%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Liquidity Comparison

PositionAvg. Volume Value (2W)Avg. Volume Value (1M)Avg. Volume Value (3M)

GCOW

Pacer Global Cash Cows Dividend ETF
$12.93M$12.74M$12.43M

IWX

iShares Russell Top 200 Value ETF
$52.73M$47.86M$34.45M

IWX vs. GCOW - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
IWX
iShares Russell Top 200 Value ETF		22.04%18.23%14.89%10.45%-5.33%23.33%1.46%25.82%-6.53%14.05%
GCOW
Pacer Global Cash Cows Dividend ETF		14.53%27.34%3.52%13.95%5.49%14.58%-4.33%17.81%-7.99%20.71%

Correlation

The correlation between IWX and GCOW is 0.50, which is low. Their historical price movements had little consistent relationship.

Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.

0.50

Correlation (3Y)
Balances recent behavior with more history.

0.63

Correlation (5Y)
Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period.

0.71

Correlation (10Y)
Provides a long-term view across more market conditions.

0.75

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 23, 2016

0.75

Over the past year, the correlation between IWX and GCOW has dropped to 0.50 - well below their long-term average of 0.75, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

IWX vs. GCOW - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
IWX
GCOW

Technology

22.6%
2.9%

Financial Services

20.0%

-

Healthcare

13.6%
17.1%

Consumer Cyclical

11.6%
7.5%

Industrials

8.3%
10.7%

Consumer Defensive

8.2%
22.3%

Energy

5.1%
11.7%

Communication Services

3.5%
15.0%

Basic Materials

2.8%
3.6%

Utilities

2.6%
6.8%

Real Estate

1.8%

-

Technology

IWX
22.6%
GCOW
2.9%

Financial Services

IWX
20.0%
GCOW

-

Healthcare

IWX
13.6%
GCOW
17.1%

Consumer Cyclical

IWX
11.6%
GCOW
7.5%

Industrials

IWX
8.3%
GCOW
10.7%

Consumer Defensive

IWX
8.2%
GCOW
22.3%

Energy

IWX
5.1%
GCOW
11.7%

Communication Services

IWX
3.5%
GCOW
15.0%

Basic Materials

IWX
2.8%
GCOW
3.6%

Utilities

IWX
2.6%
GCOW
6.8%

Real Estate

IWX
1.8%
GCOW

-

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 Top 200 Value ETF

Pacer Global Cash Cows Dividend ETF

Often compared with IWX:
IWX vs. IWNIWX vs. IWYIWX vs. IWCIWX vs. IWFIWX vs. XLPIWX vs. QQQIWX vs. SPYV
Often compared with GCOW:
GCOW vs. COWZGCOW vs. ICOWGCOW vs. SCHDGCOW vs. AVDEGCOW vs. SPYGCOW vs. MOTGGCOW vs. VOO

Return for Risk

IWX vs. GCOW — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.
IWX
IWX Risk / Return Rank: 9696
Overall Rank
IWX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9797
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IWX Sortino Ratio Rank: 9696
Sortino Ratio Rank
IWX Omega Ratio Rank: 9696
Omega Ratio Rank
IWX Calmar Ratio Rank: 9595
Calmar Ratio Rank
IWX Martin Ratio Rank: 9696
Martin Ratio Rank
GCOW
GCOW Risk / Return Rank: 8989
Overall Rank
GCOW Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9393
Sharpe Ratio Rank
GCOW Sortino Ratio Rank: 9393
Sortino Ratio Rank
GCOW Omega Ratio Rank: 9292
Omega Ratio Rank
GCOW Calmar Ratio Rank: 8787
Calmar Ratio Rank
GCOW Martin Ratio Rank: 8181
Martin Ratio Rank
The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

IWX vs. GCOW - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Russell Top 200 Value ETF (IWX) 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.

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.

IWXGCOWDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
3.40
2.54

+0.86

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
4.70
3.66

+1.04

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.61

1.45

+0.16

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

5.52

3.53

+1.99

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

24.26

10.89

+13.37

IWX vs. GCOW - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IWX Sharpe Ratio is 3.40, which is higher than the GCOW Sharpe Ratio of 2.54. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IWX 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...

Drawdowns

IWX vs. GCOW - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IWX drawdown since its inception was -35.76%, roughly equal to the maximum GCOW drawdown of -37.64%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IWX and GCOW.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

IWXGCOWDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-35.76%

-37.64%

+1.88%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-6.59%

-7.83%

+1.24%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-13.37%

-12.35%

-1.02%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-18.13%

-21.48%

+3.35%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-35.76%

-37.64%

+1.88%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

0.00%

-0.94%

+0.94%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-3.79%

-5.81%

+2.02%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.50%

2.53%

-1.03%

Volatility

IWX vs. GCOW - Volatility Comparison

iShares Russell Top 200 Value ETF (IWX) and Pacer Global Cash Cows Dividend ETF (GCOW) have volatilities of 2.94% and 2.96%, 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

IWXGCOWDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

2.94%

2.96%

-0.02%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

8.50%

8.54%

-0.04%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

10.71%

10.90%

-0.19%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

13.89%

13.55%

+0.34%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

16.49%

16.01%

+0.48%

IWX vs. GCOW - Expense Ratio Comparison

IWX has a 0.20% expense ratio, which is lower than GCOW's 0.60% expense ratio.

Dividends

IWX vs. GCOW - Dividend Comparison

IWX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.38%, less than GCOW's 4.59% yield.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
GCOW
Pacer Global Cash Cows Dividend ETF		4.59%4.06%5.14%5.28%4.39%4.23%4.12%4.40%3.94%2.79%1.95%0.00%
IWX
iShares Russell Top 200 Value ETF		1.38%1.59%1.97%2.13%2.07%1.79%2.12%2.60%2.66%2.12%2.22%2.77%

Frequently Asked Questions

IWX and GCOW have a correlation of 0.50, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

GCOW has higher volatility (2.96%) compared to IWX (2.94%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IWX dropped -35.76% vs GCOW's -37.64%.

On 10-year performance, IWX leads with 12.05% vs 9.81% for GCOW. On fees, IWX is cheaper at 0.20% per year. Their volatility is very similar. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, IWX has performed better with a 12.05% return vs 9.81%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

IWX is cheaper with a 0.20% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for GCOW.

GCOW has the higher dividend yield at 4.59%, compared with 1.38% for IWX.

IWX tracks Russell Top 200 Value Index, while GCOW tracks Pacer Global Cash Cows Dividends Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Pacer. Their fees differ too: 0.20% for IWX and 0.60% for GCOW.

IWX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.40 vs 2.54), 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 IWX 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