MAVF vs. GCOW

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

MAVF (Matrix Advisors Value ETF) and GCOW (Pacer Global Cash Cows Dividend ETF) are both Large Cap Value Equities funds. MAVF is actively managed, while GCOW is passively managed. Over the past year, MAVF returned 35.78% vs 27.54% for GCOW. At a 0.38 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. MAVF charges 0.75%/yr vs 0.60%/yr for GCOW.

Performance

MAVF vs. GCOW - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Matrix Advisors Value ETF (MAVF) and Pacer Global Cash Cows Dividend ETF (GCOW). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both stocks are quite close, with MAVF having a 12.63% return and GCOW slightly lower at 12.25%.

MAVF

• 1D: 1.31%
• 1M: 3.75%
• YTD: 12.63%
• 6M: 12.50%
• 1Y: 35.78%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

GCOW

• 1D: 0.06%
• 1M: -0.57%
• YTD: 12.25%
• 6M: 13.50%
• 1Y: 27.54%
• 3Y*: 17.57%
• 5Y*: 12.36%
• 10Y*: 9.81%

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

MAVF vs. GCOW - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
MAVF Matrix Advisors Value ETF	12.63%	19.46%
GCOW Pacer Global Cash Cows Dividend ETF	12.25%	18.26%

Correlation

The correlation between MAVF and GCOW is 0.36, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.36
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 25, 2025	0.38

MAVF vs. GCOW - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	MAVF	GCOW
Financial Services	26.7%	-
Technology	23.9%	0.9%
Communication Services	15.5%	14.6%
Consumer Cyclical	10.9%	4.6%
Industrials	8.4%	12.4%
Healthcare	7.9%	14.6%
Consumer Defensive	6.7%	17.1%
Basic Materials	-	7.3%
Energy	-	24.4%
Real Estate	-	-
Utilities	-	4.1%

Return for Risk

MAVF vs. GCOW — Risk / Return Rank

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

MAVF

MAVF Risk / Return Rank: 75
MAVF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 81
MAVF Sortino Ratio Rank: 79
MAVF Omega Ratio Rank: 78
MAVF Calmar Ratio Rank: 67
MAVF Martin Ratio Rank: 72

GCOW

GCOW Risk / Return Rank: 82
GCOW Sharpe Ratio Rank: 80
GCOW Sortino Ratio Rank: 83
GCOW Omega Ratio Rank: 77
GCOW Calmar Ratio Rank: 91
GCOW Martin Ratio Rank: 79

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.

MAVF vs. GCOW - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Matrix Advisors Value ETF (MAVF) 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.

	MAVF	GCOW	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.57	2.56	+0.01
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.48	3.68	-0.19
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.45	1.45	0.00
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.28	5.80	-2.52
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	13.38	15.21	-1.83
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

MAVF vs. GCOW - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MAVF Sharpe Ratio is 2.57, which is comparable to the GCOW Sharpe Ratio of 2.56. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MAVF 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.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	MAVF	GCOW	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.57	2.56	+0.01
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.92	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	0.61	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.37	0.59	+0.78

Drawdowns

MAVF vs. GCOW - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MAVF drawdown since its inception was -16.44%, smaller than the maximum GCOW drawdown of -37.64%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MAVF and GCOW.

Drawdown Indicators

	MAVF	GCOW	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-16.44%	-37.64%	+21.20%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-10.94%	-4.77%	-6.17%
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	0.00%	-2.67%	+2.67%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.41%	-5.84%	+3.43%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.68%	1.81%	+0.87%

Volatility

MAVF vs. GCOW - Volatility Comparison

Matrix Advisors Value ETF (MAVF) has a higher volatility of 3.57% compared to Pacer Global Cash Cows Dividend ETF (GCOW) at 2.75%. This indicates that MAVF'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

	MAVF	GCOW	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.57%	2.75%	+0.82%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	10.62%	7.99%	+2.63%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	13.98%	10.80%	+3.18%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	19.16%	13.48%	+5.68%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	19.16%	16.20%	+2.96%

MAVF vs. GCOW - Expense Ratio Comparison

MAVF has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is higher than GCOW's 0.60% expense ratio.

Dividends

MAVF vs. GCOW - Dividend Comparison

MAVF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.38%, less than GCOW's 5.39% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016
GCOW Pacer Global Cash Cows Dividend ETF	5.39%	4.06%	5.14%	5.28%	4.39%	4.23%	4.12%	4.40%	3.94%	2.79%	1.95%
MAVF Matrix Advisors Value ETF	0.38%	0.42%	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 MAVF and GCOW in my portfolio?

MAVF and GCOW have a correlation of 0.36, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, MAVF or GCOW?

MAVF has higher volatility (3.57%) compared to GCOW (2.75%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MAVF dropped -16.44% vs GCOW's -37.64%.

Which ETF is better, MAVF or GCOW?

On 1-year performance, MAVF leads with 35.78% vs 27.54% for GCOW. On fees, GCOW is cheaper at 0.60% per year. On volatility, GCOW has been the lower-risk option at 2.75%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, MAVF or GCOW?

Over the 1-year period, MAVF has performed better with a 35.78% return vs 27.54%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, MAVF or GCOW?

GCOW is cheaper with a 0.60% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for MAVF.

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

GCOW has the higher dividend yield at 5.39%, compared with 0.38% for MAVF.

What is the main difference between MAVF and GCOW?

They also come from different issuers: Matrix Asset Advisors and Pacer. Their fees differ too: 0.75% for MAVF and 0.60% for GCOW.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

MAVF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.57 vs 2.56), 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.