LCOW vs. GCOW

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

LCOW (Pacer S&P 500 Quality FCF Aristocrats ETF) and GCOW (Pacer Global Cash Cows Dividend ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - LCOW is a S&P 500 fund tracking the S&P 500 Quality FCF Aristocrats Index, while GCOW is a Large Cap Value Equities fund tracking the Pacer Global Cash Cows Dividends Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, LCOW returned 18.67% vs 21.14% for GCOW. At a 0.31 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. LCOW charges 0.49%/yr vs 0.60%/yr for GCOW.

Performance

LCOW vs. GCOW - 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 Global Cash Cows Dividend ETF (GCOW). 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 lower than GCOW's 7.34% return.

LCOW

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

GCOW

• 1D: 0.00%
• 1M: -6.00%
• YTD: 7.34%
• 6M: 7.32%
• 1Y: 21.14%
• 3Y*: 15.59%
• 5Y*: 11.72%
• 10Y*: 9.95%

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

LCOW vs. GCOW - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
LCOW Pacer S&P 500 Quality FCF Aristocrats ETF	3.86%	20.51%
GCOW Pacer Global Cash Cows Dividend ETF	7.34%	16.07%

Correlation

The correlation between LCOW and GCOW is 0.30, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.30
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 7, 2025	0.31

Return for Risk

LCOW vs. GCOW — 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

GCOW

GCOW Risk / Return Rank: 60
GCOW Sharpe Ratio Rank: 60
GCOW Sortino Ratio Rank: 61
GCOW Omega Ratio Rank: 56
GCOW Calmar Ratio Rank: 64
GCOW Martin Ratio Rank: 61

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. GCOW - 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 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.

	LCOW	GCOW	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.52	1.91	-0.39
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.16	2.74	-0.58
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.27	1.33	-0.07
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.81	3.06	-1.25
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	7.50	10.42	-2.92

LCOW vs. GCOW - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current LCOW Sharpe Ratio is 1.52, which is comparable to the GCOW Sharpe Ratio of 1.91. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of LCOW 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.

Drawdowns

LCOW vs. GCOW - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum LCOW drawdown since its inception was -10.34%, smaller than the maximum GCOW drawdown of -37.64%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LCOW and GCOW.

Drawdown Indicators

	LCOW	GCOW	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-10.34%	-37.64%	+27.30%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-10.34%	-6.93%	-3.41%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-12.35%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-21.48%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-37.64%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-3.08%	-6.93%	+3.85%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.41%	-5.83%	+4.42%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.50%	2.03%	+0.47%

Volatility

LCOW vs. GCOW - Volatility Comparison

Pacer S&P 500 Quality FCF Aristocrats ETF (LCOW) has a higher volatility of 4.04% compared to Pacer Global Cash Cows Dividend ETF (GCOW) at 2.89%. This indicates that LCOW's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than GCOW based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	LCOW	GCOW	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.04%	2.89%	+1.15%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	9.71%	8.29%	+1.42%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	12.33%	11.09%	+1.24%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	12.52%	13.50%	-0.98%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	12.52%	16.03%	-3.51%

LCOW vs. GCOW - Expense Ratio Comparison

LCOW has a 0.49% expense ratio, which is lower than GCOW's 0.60% expense ratio.

Dividends

LCOW vs. GCOW - Dividend Comparison

LCOW's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.65%, less than GCOW's 4.90% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016
GCOW Pacer Global Cash Cows Dividend ETF	4.90%	4.06%	5.14%	5.28%	4.39%	4.23%	4.12%	4.40%	3.94%	2.79%	1.95%
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 GCOW in my portfolio?

LCOW and GCOW have a correlation of 0.30, 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 GCOW?

LCOW has higher volatility (4.04%) compared to GCOW (2.89%). In terms of maximum drawdown, LCOW dropped -10.34% vs GCOW's -37.64%.

Which ETF is better, LCOW or GCOW?

On 1-year performance, GCOW leads with 21.14% vs 18.67% for LCOW. On fees, LCOW is cheaper at 0.49% per year. On volatility, GCOW has been the lower-risk option at 2.89%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, LCOW or GCOW?

Over the 1-year period, GCOW has performed better with a 21.14% return vs 18.67%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, LCOW or GCOW?

LCOW is cheaper with a 0.49% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for GCOW.

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

GCOW has the higher dividend yield at 4.90%, compared with 0.65% for LCOW.

What is the main difference between LCOW and GCOW?

LCOW is categorized as S&P 500, while GCOW is Large Cap Value Equities. LCOW tracks S&P 500 Quality FCF Aristocrats Index, while GCOW tracks Pacer Global Cash Cows Dividends Index. Their fees differ too: 0.49% for LCOW and 0.60% for GCOW.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

GCOW currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.91 vs 1.52), 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.