MCOW vs. BMVP

Last updated Jun 23, 2026

MCOW (Pacer S&P MidCap 400 Quality FCF Aristocrats ETF) and BMVP (Invesco Bloomberg MVP Multi-factor ETF) are both Mid Cap Blend Equities funds - MCOW tracks the S&P MidCap 400 Quality FCF Aristocrats Index while BMVP tracks the Bloomberg MVP Index. Both are passively managed. A 0.55 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. MCOW charges 0.49%/yr vs 0.29%/yr for BMVP.

Performance

MCOW vs. BMVP - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Pacer S&P MidCap 400 Quality FCF Aristocrats ETF (MCOW) and Invesco Bloomberg MVP Multi-factor ETF (BMVP). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, MCOW achieves a 7.58% return, which is significantly higher than BMVP's 4.77% return.

MCOW

• 1D: 0.23%
• 1M: 2.01%
• YTD: 7.58%
• 6M: 5.32%
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

BMVP

• 1D: -0.03%
• 1M: -2.12%
• YTD: 4.77%
• 6M: 3.89%
• 1Y: 8.99%
• 3Y*: 12.90%
• 5Y*: 6.51%
• 10Y*: 9.59%

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

MCOW vs. BMVP - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
MCOW Pacer S&P MidCap 400 Quality FCF Aristocrats ETF	7.58%	-3.62%
BMVP Invesco Bloomberg MVP Multi-factor ETF	4.77%	0.09%

Correlation

The correlation between MCOW and BMVP is 0.55, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 28, 2025	0.55

Return for Risk

MCOW vs. BMVP — Risk / Return Rank

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

MCOW

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

BMVP

BMVP Risk / Return Rank: 27
BMVP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 26
BMVP Sortino Ratio Rank: 26
BMVP Omega Ratio Rank: 23
BMVP Calmar Ratio Rank: 29
BMVP Martin Ratio Rank: 31

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.

MCOW vs. BMVP - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Pacer S&P MidCap 400 Quality FCF Aristocrats ETF (MCOW) and Invesco Bloomberg MVP Multi-factor ETF (BMVP). 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.

	MCOW	BMVP	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	—	0.92	—
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	—	1.38	—
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	—	1.16	—
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	—	1.40	—
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	—	4.21	—

Drawdowns

MCOW vs. BMVP - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MCOW drawdown since its inception was -15.02%, smaller than the maximum BMVP drawdown of -78.13%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MCOW and BMVP.

Drawdown Indicators

	MCOW	BMVP	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-15.02%	-78.13%	+63.11%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	—	-6.45%	—
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-15.12%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-26.58%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-39.45%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.45%	-3.37%	+1.92%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-4.46%	-36.13%	+31.67%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	—	2.14%	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	MCOW	BMVP	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	—	2.78%	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	—	7.26%	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	17.96%	9.86%	+8.10%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	17.96%	16.03%	+1.93%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	17.96%	18.81%	-0.85%

MCOW vs. BMVP - Expense Ratio Comparison

MCOW has a 0.49% expense ratio, which is higher than BMVP's 0.29% expense ratio.

Dividends

MCOW vs. BMVP - Dividend Comparison

MCOW's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.21%, less than BMVP's 2.17% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
BMVP Invesco Bloomberg MVP Multi-factor ETF	2.17%	1.77%	1.58%	1.67%	1.51%	0.56%	1.09%	0.95%	1.44%	1.75%	1.35%	1.02%
MCOW Pacer S&P MidCap 400 Quality FCF Aristocrats ETF	0.21%	0.11%	0.00%	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 MCOW and BMVP in my portfolio?

MCOW and BMVP have a correlation of 0.55, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, MCOW or BMVP?

On fees, BMVP is cheaper at 0.29% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, MCOW or BMVP?

BMVP is cheaper with a 0.29% expense ratio, compared with 0.49% for MCOW.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, MCOW or BMVP?

BMVP has the higher dividend yield at 2.17%, compared with 0.21% for MCOW.

What is the main difference between MCOW and BMVP?

MCOW tracks S&P MidCap 400 Quality FCF Aristocrats Index, while BMVP tracks Bloomberg MVP Index. They also come from different issuers: Pacer and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.49% for MCOW and 0.29% for BMVP.