LCOW vs. COWZ

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

LCOW (Pacer S&P 500 Quality FCF Aristocrats ETF) and COWZ (Pacer US Cash Cows 100 ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - LCOW is a S&P 500 fund tracking the S&P 500 Quality FCF Aristocrats 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 year, LCOW returned 18.67% vs 15.76% for COWZ. A 0.57 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. Both charge a 0.49% expense ratio.

Performance

LCOW vs. COWZ - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Pacer S&P 500 Quality FCF Aristocrats ETF (LCOW) 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, LCOW achieves a 3.86% return, which is significantly higher than COWZ's 3.27% return.

LCOW

• 1D: -0.79%
• 1M: -1.60%
• YTD: 3.86%
• 6M: 2.96%
• 1Y: 18.67%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

COWZ

• 1D: 0.59%
• 1M: -3.72%
• YTD: 3.27%
• 6M: 2.69%
• 1Y: 15.76%
• 3Y*: 12.38%
• 5Y*: 9.90%
• 10Y*: —

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

LCOW vs. COWZ - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
LCOW Pacer S&P 500 Quality FCF Aristocrats ETF	3.86%	20.51%
COWZ Pacer US Cash Cows 100 ETF	3.27%	18.02%

Correlation

The correlation between LCOW and COWZ is 0.55, 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	0.55
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 7, 2025	0.57

The correlation between LCOW and COWZ has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.55 to 0.57 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

LCOW vs. COWZ — Risk / Return Rank

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

LCOW

LCOW Risk / Return Rank: 45
LCOW Sharpe Ratio Rank: 47
LCOW Sortino Ratio Rank: 46
LCOW Omega Ratio Rank: 44
LCOW Calmar Ratio Rank: 38
LCOW Martin Ratio Rank: 47

COWZ

COWZ Risk / Return Rank: 45
COWZ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 41
COWZ Sortino Ratio Rank: 42
COWZ Omega Ratio Rank: 39
COWZ Calmar Ratio Rank: 56
COWZ Martin Ratio Rank: 48

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.

LCOW vs. COWZ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Pacer S&P 500 Quality FCF Aristocrats ETF (LCOW) 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.

	LCOW	COWZ	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.52	1.39	+0.13
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.16	2.05	+0.11
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.27	1.25	+0.02
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.81	2.66	-0.84
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	7.50	7.92	-0.42

LCOW vs. COWZ - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current LCOW Sharpe Ratio is 1.52, which is comparable to the COWZ Sharpe Ratio of 1.39. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of LCOW 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

LCOW vs. COWZ - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum LCOW drawdown since its inception was -10.34%, smaller than the maximum COWZ drawdown of -38.63%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LCOW and COWZ.

Drawdown Indicators

	LCOW	COWZ	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-10.34%	-38.63%	+28.29%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-10.34%	-5.95%	-4.39%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-22.00%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-22.00%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-3.08%	-5.40%	+2.32%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.41%	-4.80%	+3.39%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.50%	2.00%	+0.50%

Volatility

LCOW vs. COWZ - Volatility Comparison

Pacer S&P 500 Quality FCF Aristocrats ETF (LCOW) and Pacer US Cash Cows 100 ETF (COWZ) have volatilities of 4.04% and 3.97%, 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

	LCOW	COWZ	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.04%	3.97%	+0.07%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	9.71%	7.53%	+2.18%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	12.33%	11.38%	+0.95%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	12.52%	17.64%	-5.12%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	12.52%	19.90%	-7.38%

LCOW vs. COWZ - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both LCOW and COWZ have an expense ratio of 0.49%.

Dividends

LCOW vs. COWZ - Dividend Comparison

LCOW's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.65%, less than COWZ's 2.00% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016
COWZ Pacer US Cash Cows 100 ETF	2.00%	2.19%	1.82%	1.92%	1.96%	1.48%	2.54%	1.96%	1.67%	1.95%	0.13%
LCOW Pacer S&P 500 Quality FCF Aristocrats ETF	0.65%	0.43%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both LCOW and COWZ in my portfolio?

LCOW and COWZ have a correlation of 0.55, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, LCOW or COWZ?

LCOW has higher volatility (4.04%) compared to COWZ (3.97%). In terms of maximum drawdown, LCOW dropped -10.34% vs COWZ's -38.63%.

Which ETF is better, LCOW or COWZ?

On 1-year performance, LCOW leads with 18.67% vs 15.76% for COWZ. Both ETFs have the same 0.49% expense ratio. Their volatility is very similar. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, LCOW or COWZ?

Over the 1-year period, LCOW has performed better with a 18.67% return vs 15.76%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, LCOW or COWZ?

LCOW and COWZ have the same expense ratio: 0.49% per year.

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

COWZ has the higher dividend yield at 2.00%, compared with 0.65% for LCOW.

What is the main difference between LCOW and COWZ?

LCOW is categorized as S&P 500, while COWZ is Mid Cap Value Equities. LCOW tracks S&P 500 Quality FCF Aristocrats Index, while COWZ tracks Pacer US Cash Cows 100 Index.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

LCOW currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.52 vs 1.39), 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.