PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
MCOW vs. FLRT
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

MCOW vs. FLRT - 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 Pacer Aristotle Pacific Floating Rate High Income ETF (FLRT). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, MCOW achieves a 8.57% return, which is significantly higher than FLRT's 2.39% return.


MCOW

1D
0.18%
1M
-0.04%
6M
7.96%
YTD
8.57%
1Y
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
ALL TIME*

FLRT

1D
0.06%
1M
0.38%
6M
2.08%
YTD
2.39%
1Y
5.09%
3Y*
7.87%
5Y*
6.08%
10Y*
4.83%
ALL TIME*
4.48%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Liquidity Comparison


PositionAvg. Volume Value (2W)Avg. Volume Value (1M)Avg. Volume Value (3M)
$4.88M$4.59M$4.78M
$5.40K$63.77K$46.18K

MCOW vs. FLRT - Yearly Performance Comparison


Correlation

The correlation between MCOW and FLRT is 0.42, which is low. Their historical price movements had little consistent relationship.


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

0.42

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

MCOW vs. FLRT — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks 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.


FLRT
FLRT Risk / Return Rank: 9191
Overall Rank
FLRT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9797
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FLRT Sortino Ratio Rank: 9797
Sortino Ratio Rank
FLRT Omega Ratio Rank: 9797
Omega Ratio Rank
FLRT Calmar Ratio Rank: 8181
Calmar Ratio Rank
FLRT Martin Ratio Rank: 8181
Martin Ratio Rank
The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

MCOW vs. FLRT - 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 Pacer Aristotle Pacific Floating Rate High Income ETF (FLRT). 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.


MCOWFLRTDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.76

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.89

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

10.59

MCOW vs. FLRT - Sharpe Ratio Comparison


Loading charts...

Drawdowns

MCOW vs. FLRT - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MCOW drawdown since its inception was -15.02%, smaller than the maximum FLRT drawdown of -20.96%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MCOW and FLRT.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


MCOWFLRTDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-15.02%

-20.96%

+5.94%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-1.78%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-2.87%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-7.60%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-20.96%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.87%

0.00%

-1.87%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-4.19%

-1.39%

-2.80%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

0.48%

Volatility

MCOW vs. FLRT - Volatility Comparison


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


MCOWFLRTDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

0.29%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

1.19%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

17.51%

1.49%

+16.02%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

17.51%

2.30%

+15.21%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

17.51%

6.09%

+11.42%

MCOW vs. FLRT - Expense Ratio Comparison

MCOW has a 0.49% expense ratio, which is lower than FLRT's 0.60% expense ratio.


Dividends

MCOW vs. FLRT - Dividend Comparison

MCOW's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.21%, less than FLRT's 6.72% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
FLRT
Pacer Aristotle Pacific Floating Rate High Income ETF
6.72%6.93%7.93%8.40%5.81%3.16%3.52%4.30%3.95%3.20%3.38%3.21%
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


MCOW and FLRT have a correlation of 0.42, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, MCOW is cheaper at 0.49% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

MCOW is cheaper with a 0.49% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for FLRT.

FLRT has the higher dividend yield at 6.72%, compared with 0.21% for MCOW.

MCOW is categorized as Quality Factor, while FLRT is Bank Loan. Their fees differ too: 0.49% for MCOW and 0.60% for FLRT.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for MCOW and FLRT

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