KMID vs. COWG

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

KMID (Virtus KAR Mid-Cap ETF) and COWG (Pacer US Large Cap Cash Cows Growth Leaders ETF) are both Mid Cap Growth Equities funds. KMID is actively managed, while COWG is passively managed. Over the past year, KMID returned 0.73% vs 13.09% for COWG. A 0.64 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. KMID charges 0.80%/yr vs 0.49%/yr for COWG.

Performance

KMID vs. COWG - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Virtus KAR Mid-Cap ETF (KMID) and Pacer US Large Cap Cash Cows Growth Leaders ETF (COWG). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, KMID achieves a 1.86% return, which is significantly lower than COWG's 12.42% return.

KMID

• 1D: 0.52%
• 1M: 0.10%
• YTD: 1.86%
• 6M: 1.78%
• 1Y: 0.73%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

COWG

• 1D: -0.07%
• 1M: 7.01%
• YTD: 12.42%
• 6M: 12.40%
• 1Y: 13.09%
• 3Y*: 24.56%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

KMID vs. COWG - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
KMID Virtus KAR Mid-Cap ETF	1.86%	0.31%	-2.93%
COWG Pacer US Large Cap Cash Cows Growth Leaders ETF	12.42%	10.24%	8.04%

Correlation

The correlation between KMID and COWG is 0.64, 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	0.64
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 17, 2024	0.64

The correlation between KMID and COWG has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.64 to 0.64 - a consistent structural relationship.

KMID vs. COWG - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	KMID	COWG
Industrials	49.3%	3.6%
Technology	19.1%	48.5%
Financial Services	12.1%	-
Healthcare	10.8%	21.0%
Consumer Cyclical	8.8%	3.2%
Basic Materials	-	6.5%
Communication Services	-	5.2%
Consumer Defensive	-	2.0%
Energy	-	8.4%
Real Estate	-	-
Utilities	-	1.5%

Return for Risk

KMID vs. COWG — Risk / Return Rank

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

KMID

KMID Risk / Return Rank: 10
KMID Sharpe Ratio Rank: 10
KMID Sortino Ratio Rank: 9
KMID Omega Ratio Rank: 9
KMID Calmar Ratio Rank: 10
KMID Martin Ratio Rank: 10

COWG

COWG Risk / Return Rank: 25
COWG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 24
COWG Sortino Ratio Rank: 24
COWG Omega Ratio Rank: 23
COWG Calmar Ratio Rank: 26
COWG Martin Ratio Rank: 27

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.

KMID vs. COWG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Virtus KAR Mid-Cap ETF (KMID) and Pacer US Large Cap Cash Cows Growth Leaders ETF (COWG). 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.

	KMID	COWG	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.05	0.82	-0.77
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.18	1.22	-1.04
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.02	1.15	-0.13
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.07	1.22	-1.15
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	0.17	3.57	-3.40
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

KMID vs. COWG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current KMID Sharpe Ratio is 0.05, which is lower than the COWG Sharpe Ratio of 0.82. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of KMID and COWG, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	KMID	COWG	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.05	0.82	-0.77
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	-0.03	1.18	-1.21

Drawdowns

KMID vs. COWG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum KMID drawdown since its inception was -18.89%, smaller than the maximum COWG drawdown of -23.60%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for KMID and COWG.

Drawdown Indicators

	KMID	COWG	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-18.89%	-23.60%	+4.71%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-10.71%	-10.79%	+0.08%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-23.60%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-5.28%	-0.07%	-5.21%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-5.77%	-3.28%	-2.49%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.27%	3.67%	+0.60%

Volatility

KMID vs. COWG - Volatility Comparison

Virtus KAR Mid-Cap ETF (KMID) and Pacer US Large Cap Cash Cows Growth Leaders ETF (COWG) have volatilities of 3.78% and 3.63%, 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.

Volatility by Period

	KMID	COWG	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.78%	3.63%	+0.15%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	11.17%	12.01%	-0.84%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	14.34%	15.94%	-1.60%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	16.91%	19.09%	-2.18%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	16.91%	19.09%	-2.18%

KMID vs. COWG - Expense Ratio Comparison

KMID has a 0.80% expense ratio, which is higher than COWG's 0.49% expense ratio.

Dividends

KMID vs. COWG - Dividend Comparison

KMID's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.11%, less than COWG's 0.38% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023
COWG Pacer US Large Cap Cash Cows Growth Leaders ETF	0.38%	0.32%	0.40%	0.47%
KMID Virtus KAR Mid-Cap ETF	0.11%	0.06%	0.05%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both KMID and COWG in my portfolio?

KMID and COWG have a correlation of 0.64, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, KMID or COWG?

KMID has higher volatility (3.78%) compared to COWG (3.63%). In terms of maximum drawdown, KMID dropped -18.89% vs COWG's -23.60%.

Which ETF is better, KMID or COWG?

On 1-year performance, COWG leads with 13.09% vs 0.73% for KMID. On fees, COWG is cheaper at 0.49% per year. On volatility, COWG has been the lower-risk option at 3.63%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, KMID or COWG?

Over the 1-year period, COWG has performed better with a 13.09% return vs 0.73%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, KMID or COWG?

COWG is cheaper with a 0.49% expense ratio, compared with 0.80% for KMID.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, KMID or COWG?

COWG has the higher dividend yield at 0.38%, compared with 0.11% for KMID.

What is the main difference between KMID and COWG?

They also come from different issuers: Virtus and Pacer. Their fees differ too: 0.80% for KMID and 0.49% for COWG.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

COWG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.82 vs 0.05), 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.