LCOW vs. RSPG

Last updated Apr 1, 2026

Compare and contrast key facts about Pacer S&P 500 Quality FCF Aristocrats ETF (LCOW) and Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight Energy ETF (RSPG).

LCOW and RSPG are both exchange-traded funds (ETFs), meaning they are traded on stock exchanges and can be bought and sold throughout the day. LCOW is a passively managed fund by Pacer that tracks the performance of the S&P 500 Quality FCF Aristocrats Index. It was launched on May 6, 2025. RSPG is a passively managed fund by Invesco that tracks the performance of the S&P 500 Equal Weight Energy Plus Index. It was launched on Nov 1, 2006. Both LCOW and RSPG are passive ETFs, meaning that they are not actively managed but aim to replicate the performance of the underlying index as closely as possible.

Performance

LCOW vs. RSPG - 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 Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight Energy ETF (RSPG). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

LCOW vs. RSPG - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
LCOW Pacer S&P 500 Quality FCF Aristocrats ETF	-6.66%	20.51%
RSPG Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight Energy ETF	38.21%	15.68%

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, LCOW achieves a -6.66% return, which is significantly lower than RSPG's 38.21% return.

LCOW

• 1D: 2.46%
• 1M: -5.94%
• YTD: -6.66%
• 6M: -3.79%
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

RSPG

• 1D: -1.17%
• 1M: 10.24%
• YTD: 38.21%
• 6M: 39.08%
• 1Y: 37.07%
• 3Y*: 20.00%
• 5Y*: 24.76%
• 10Y*: 11.62%

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

LCOW vs. RSPG - Expense Ratio Comparison

LCOW has a 0.49% expense ratio, which is higher than RSPG's 0.40% expense ratio.

LCOW

Pacer S&P 500 Quality FCF Aristocrats ETF

RSPG

Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight Energy ETF

Return for Risk

LCOW vs. RSPG — Risk / Return Rank

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

RSPG

RSPG Risk / Return Rank: 70
RSPG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 76
RSPG Sortino Ratio Rank: 71
RSPG Omega Ratio Rank: 74
RSPG Calmar Ratio Rank: 73
RSPG Martin Ratio Rank: 55

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. RSPG - 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 Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight Energy ETF (RSPG). 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.

Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	LCOW	RSPG	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	—	1.36	—
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.87	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	0.35	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.13	0.19	+0.95

Correlation

The correlation between LCOW and RSPG is 0.03, which is considered to be low. This implies their price changes are not closely related. A low correlation is generally favorable for portfolio diversification, as it helps to reduce overall risk by spreading it across multiple assets with different performance patterns.

Dividends

LCOW vs. RSPG - Dividend Comparison

LCOW's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.57%, less than RSPG's 1.89% yield.

	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
LCOW Pacer S&P 500 Quality FCF Aristocrats ETF	0.57%	0.43%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
RSPG Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight Energy ETF	1.89%	2.60%	2.43%	2.84%	3.43%	2.37%	3.15%	2.15%	2.18%	2.55%	1.14%	2.80%

Drawdowns

LCOW vs. RSPG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum LCOW drawdown since its inception was -10.34%, smaller than the maximum RSPG drawdown of -79.98%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LCOW and RSPG.

Drawdown Indicators

	LCOW	RSPG	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-10.34%	-79.98%	+69.64%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	—	-21.05%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-28.44%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-73.17%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-7.92%	-2.90%	-5.02%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.37%	-25.63%	+24.26%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	—	7.54%	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	LCOW	RSPG	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	—	5.25%	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	—	14.93%	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	12.45%	27.50%	-15.05%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	12.45%	28.52%	-16.07%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	12.45%	33.57%	-21.12%