LCOW vs. SQLV
LCOW (Pacer S&P 500 Quality FCF Aristocrats ETF) and SQLV (Royce Quant Small-Cap Quality Value ETF) are both Quality Factor funds. LCOW is passively managed, while SQLV is actively managed. Over the past year, LCOW returned 19.31% vs 37.64% for SQLV. Their 0.61 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. LCOW charges 0.49%/yr vs 0.60%/yr for SQLV.
Performance
LCOW vs. SQLV - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, LCOW achieves a 8.56% return, which is significantly lower than SQLV's 23.57% return.
LCOW
- 1D
- 0.52%
- 1M
- 1.05%
- 6M
- 8.03%
- YTD
- 8.56%
- 1Y
- 19.31%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- 24.36%
SQLV
- 1D
- -0.45%
- 1M
- 1.00%
- 6M
- 18.55%
- YTD
- 23.57%
- 1Y
- 37.64%
- 3Y*
- 12.11%
- 5Y*
- 8.18%
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- 9.92%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $104.13K | $83.33K | $122.50K | |
| $1.18M | $614.27K | $248.07K |
LCOW vs. SQLV - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
LCOW Pacer S&P 500 Quality FCF Aristocrats ETF | 8.56% | 20.51% |
SQLV Royce Quant Small-Cap Quality Value ETF | 23.57% | 18.49% |
Correlation
The correlation between LCOW and SQLV is 0.60, which is moderate. They have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently, sharing some price drivers without tracking each other closely.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most. | 0.60 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 7, 2025 | 0.61 |
The correlation between LCOW and SQLV has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.60 to 0.61 - a consistent structural relationship.
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
Return for Risk
LCOW vs. SQLV — Risk / Return Rank
LCOW
SQLV
LCOW vs. SQLV - 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 Royce Quant Small-Cap Quality Value ETF (SQLV). 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 | SQLV | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.57 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.90 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.25 | 1.34 | -0.09 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.75 | 3.95 | -2.19 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 7.12 | 12.39 | -5.27 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
LCOW vs. SQLV - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum LCOW drawdown since its inception was -10.34%, smaller than the maximum SQLV drawdown of -48.34%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LCOW and SQLV.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| LCOW | SQLV | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -10.34% | -48.34% | +38.00% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -10.34% | -8.84% | -1.50% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -26.86% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -26.86% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.83% | -1.74% | +0.91% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -1.38% | -8.80% | +7.42% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.54% | 2.81% | -0.27% |
Volatility
LCOW vs. SQLV - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Pacer S&P 500 Quality FCF Aristocrats ETF (LCOW) is 2.89%, while Royce Quant Small-Cap Quality Value ETF (SQLV) has a volatility of 4.34%. This indicates that LCOW experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than SQLV based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| LCOW | SQLV | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 2.89% | 4.34% | -1.45% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 9.71% | 11.60% | -1.89% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 12.50% | 17.33% | -4.83% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 12.38% | 20.87% | -8.49% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 12.38% | 23.24% | -10.86% |
LCOW vs. SQLV - Expense Ratio Comparison
LCOW has a 0.49% expense ratio, which is lower than SQLV's 0.60% expense ratio.
Dividends
LCOW vs. SQLV - Dividend Comparison
LCOW's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.62%, less than SQLV's 0.95% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
LCOW Pacer S&P 500 Quality FCF Aristocrats ETF | 0.62% | 0.43% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
SQLV Royce Quant Small-Cap Quality Value ETF | 0.95% | 1.15% | 1.11% | 1.09% | 1.24% | 1.12% | 1.22% | 1.20% | 1.08% | 0.40% |
Frequently Asked Questions
LCOW and SQLV have a correlation of 0.60, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
SQLV has higher volatility (4.34%) compared to LCOW (2.89%). In terms of maximum drawdown, LCOW dropped -10.34% vs SQLV's -48.34%.
On 1-year performance, SQLV leads with 37.64% vs 19.31% for LCOW. On fees, LCOW is cheaper at 0.49% per year. On volatility, LCOW has been the lower-risk option at 2.89%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, SQLV has performed better with a 37.64% return vs 19.31%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
LCOW is cheaper with a 0.49% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for SQLV.
SQLV has the higher dividend yield at 0.95%, compared with 0.62% for LCOW.
They also come from different issuers: Pacer and Franklin Templeton. Their fees differ too: 0.49% for LCOW and 0.60% for SQLV.
SQLV currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.02 vs 1.45), 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.
Find the right allocation for LCOW and SQLV
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