MCOW vs. VFMO
MCOW (Pacer S&P MidCap 400 Quality FCF Aristocrats ETF) and VFMO (Vanguard U.S. Momentum Factor ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - MCOW is a Mid Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the S&P MidCap 400 Quality FCF Aristocrats Index, while VFMO is a Momentum fund actively managed by Vanguard. MCOW is passively managed, while VFMO is actively managed. A 0.76 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. MCOW charges 0.49%/yr vs 0.13%/yr for VFMO.
Performance
MCOW vs. VFMO - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, MCOW achieves a 7.69% return, which is significantly lower than VFMO's 28.14% return.
MCOW
- 1D
- 0.62%
- 1M
- 0.65%
- YTD
- 7.69%
- 6M
- 5.42%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
VFMO
- 1D
- 2.05%
- 1M
- 4.29%
- YTD
- 28.14%
- 6M
- 24.50%
- 1Y
- 46.44%
- 3Y*
- 28.85%
- 5Y*
- 14.38%
- 10Y*
- —
MCOW vs. VFMO - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
MCOW Pacer S&P MidCap 400 Quality FCF Aristocrats ETF | 7.69% | -3.62% |
VFMO Vanguard U.S. Momentum Factor ETF | 28.14% | 5.90% |
Correlation
The correlation between MCOW and VFMO 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 (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 28, 2025 | 0.76 |
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. VFMO — Risk / Return Rank
MCOW
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
VFMO
MCOW vs. VFMO - 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 Vanguard U.S. Momentum Factor ETF (VFMO). 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 | VFMO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | — | 1.36 | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | — | 4.25 | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | — | 15.78 | — |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
MCOW vs. VFMO - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum MCOW drawdown since its inception was -15.02%, smaller than the maximum VFMO drawdown of -36.77%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MCOW and VFMO.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| MCOW | VFMO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -15.02% | -36.77% | +21.75% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | — | -10.98% | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -24.40% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -25.80% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -1.35% | -0.53% | -0.82% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -4.43% | -7.72% | +3.29% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | — | 2.95% | — |
Volatility
MCOW vs. VFMO - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| MCOW | VFMO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | — | 8.30% | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | — | 17.41% | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 17.96% | 22.36% | -4.40% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 17.96% | 21.91% | -3.95% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 17.96% | 23.64% | -5.68% |
MCOW vs. VFMO - Expense Ratio Comparison
MCOW has a 0.49% expense ratio, which is higher than VFMO's 0.13% expense ratio.
Dividends
MCOW vs. VFMO - Dividend Comparison
MCOW's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.21%, less than VFMO's 0.57% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
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% |
VFMO Vanguard U.S. Momentum Factor ETF | 0.57% | 0.82% | 0.72% | 0.89% | 1.72% | 0.81% | 0.45% | 1.22% | 0.70% |
Frequently Asked Questions
MCOW and VFMO 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.
On fees, VFMO is cheaper at 0.13% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
VFMO is cheaper with a 0.13% expense ratio, compared with 0.49% for MCOW.
VFMO has the higher dividend yield at 0.57%, compared with 0.21% for MCOW.
MCOW is categorized as Mid Cap Blend Equities, while VFMO is Momentum. They also come from different issuers: Pacer and Vanguard. Their fees differ too: 0.49% for MCOW and 0.13% for VFMO.
Find the right allocation for MCOW and VFMO
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