LDEM vs. ECOW

Last updated Jul 17, 2026

LDEM (iShares ESG MSCI EM Leaders ETF) and ECOW (Pacer Emerging Markets Cash Cows 100 ETF) are both Emerging Markets Equities funds - LDEM tracks the MSCI EM Extended ESG Leaders 5% Issuer Capped Index while ECOW tracks the Pacer Emerging Markets Cash Cows 100 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, LDEM returned 1.51%/yr vs 7.05%/yr for ECOW. A 0.71 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. LDEM charges 0.16%/yr vs 0.70%/yr for ECOW.

Performance

LDEM vs. ECOW - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares ESG MSCI EM Leaders ETF (LDEM) and Pacer Emerging Markets Cash Cows 100 ETF (ECOW). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, LDEM achieves a 2.37% return, which is significantly lower than ECOW's 12.74% return.

LDEM

• 1D: -1.51%
• 1M: -4.09%
• 6M: -3.02%
• YTD: 2.37%
• 1Y: 11.14%
• 3Y*: 11.93%
• 5Y*: 1.51%
• 10Y*: —

ECOW

• 1D: 0.70%
• 1M: 1.60%
• 6M: 8.22%
• YTD: 12.74%
• 1Y: 30.43%
• 3Y*: 17.04%
• 5Y*: 7.05%
• 10Y*: —

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

LDEM vs. ECOW - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
LDEM iShares ESG MSCI EM Leaders ETF	2.37%	32.49%	5.87%	6.49%	-22.46%	-2.03%	16.30%
ECOW Pacer Emerging Markets Cash Cows 100 ETF	12.74%	32.50%	3.17%	15.79%	-19.28%	7.47%	4.04%

Correlation

The correlation between LDEM and ECOW is 0.76, 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	0.76
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.79
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.76
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 12, 2020	0.71

The correlation between LDEM and ECOW has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.71 to 0.79 - a consistent structural relationship.

LDEM vs. ECOW - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	LDEM	ECOW
Technology	25.4%	6.8%
Financial Services	23.7%	-
Consumer Cyclical	9.9%	14.7%
Communication Services	9.4%	12.8%
Industrials	8.2%	9.3%
Basic Materials	6.8%	11.1%
Energy	4.1%	8.6%
Consumer Defensive	3.6%	13.1%
Healthcare	3.5%	3.6%
Utilities	2.7%	7.2%
Real Estate	1.4%	-

Return for Risk

LDEM vs. ECOW — Risk / Return Rank

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

LDEM

LDEM Risk / Return Rank: 22
LDEM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 21
LDEM Sortino Ratio Rank: 20
LDEM Omega Ratio Rank: 21
LDEM Calmar Ratio Rank: 23
LDEM Martin Ratio Rank: 24

ECOW

ECOW Risk / Return Rank: 78
ECOW Sharpe Ratio Rank: 81
ECOW Sortino Ratio Rank: 78
ECOW Omega Ratio Rank: 79
ECOW Calmar Ratio Rank: 85
ECOW Martin Ratio Rank: 70

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.

LDEM vs. ECOW - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares ESG MSCI EM Leaders ETF (LDEM) and Pacer Emerging Markets Cash Cows 100 ETF (ECOW). 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.

	LDEM	ECOW	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.59	2.06	-1.47
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.92	2.79	-1.87
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.12	1.37	-0.25
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.85	3.66	-2.82
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	2.45	9.98	-7.53

LDEM vs. ECOW - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current LDEM Sharpe Ratio is 0.59, which is lower than the ECOW Sharpe Ratio of 2.06. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of LDEM and ECOW, 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

LDEM vs. ECOW - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum LDEM drawdown since its inception was -40.82%, roughly equal to the maximum ECOW drawdown of -40.27%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LDEM and ECOW.

Drawdown Indicators

	LDEM	ECOW	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-40.82%	-40.27%	-0.55%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-13.21%	-8.35%	-4.86%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-15.12%	-18.77%	+3.65%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-38.26%	-33.30%	-4.96%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-8.02%	-3.83%	-4.19%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-17.15%	-10.98%	-6.17%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.56%	3.06%	+1.50%

Volatility

LDEM vs. ECOW - Volatility Comparison

iShares ESG MSCI EM Leaders ETF (LDEM) has a higher volatility of 7.08% compared to Pacer Emerging Markets Cash Cows 100 ETF (ECOW) at 4.23%. This indicates that LDEM's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than ECOW based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	LDEM	ECOW	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	7.08%	4.23%	+2.85%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	16.71%	12.07%	+4.64%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	19.08%	14.85%	+4.23%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	19.51%	17.78%	+1.73%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	20.92%	20.08%	+0.84%

LDEM vs. ECOW - Expense Ratio Comparison

LDEM has a 0.16% expense ratio, which is lower than ECOW's 0.70% expense ratio.

Dividends

LDEM vs. ECOW - Dividend Comparison

LDEM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.00%, less than ECOW's 4.45% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019
ECOW Pacer Emerging Markets Cash Cows 100 ETF	4.45%	5.20%	7.35%	5.46%	7.50%	4.39%	3.35%	8.08%
LDEM iShares ESG MSCI EM Leaders ETF	3.00%	3.26%	2.64%	3.20%	4.93%	1.82%	1.89%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both LDEM and ECOW in my portfolio?

LDEM and ECOW have a correlation of 0.76, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, LDEM or ECOW?

LDEM has higher volatility (7.08%) compared to ECOW (4.23%). In terms of maximum drawdown, LDEM dropped -40.82% vs ECOW's -40.27%.

Which ETF is better, LDEM or ECOW?

On 5-year performance, ECOW leads with 7.05% vs 1.51% for LDEM. On fees, LDEM is cheaper at 0.16% per year. On volatility, ECOW has been the lower-risk option at 4.23%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, LDEM or ECOW?

Over the 5-year period, ECOW has performed better with a 7.05% return vs 1.51%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, LDEM or ECOW?

LDEM is cheaper with a 0.16% expense ratio, compared with 0.70% for ECOW.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, LDEM or ECOW?

ECOW has the higher dividend yield at 4.45%, compared with 3.00% for LDEM.

What is the main difference between LDEM and ECOW?

LDEM tracks MSCI EM Extended ESG Leaders 5% Issuer Capped Index, while ECOW tracks Pacer Emerging Markets Cash Cows 100 Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Pacer. Their fees differ too: 0.16% for LDEM and 0.70% for ECOW.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

ECOW currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.06 vs 0.59), 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.