NOBL vs. GCOW

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

NOBL (ProShares S&P 500 Dividend Aristocrats ETF) and GCOW (Pacer Global Cash Cows Dividend ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - NOBL is a Dividend fund tracking the S&P 500 Dividend Aristocrats Index, while GCOW is a Large Cap Value Equities fund tracking the Pacer Global Cash Cows Dividends Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, NOBL returned 9.51%/yr vs 9.91%/yr for GCOW. A 0.73 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. NOBL charges 0.35%/yr vs 0.60%/yr for GCOW.

Performance

NOBL vs. GCOW - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in ProShares S&P 500 Dividend Aristocrats ETF (NOBL) and Pacer Global Cash Cows Dividend ETF (GCOW). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, NOBL achieves a 3.51% return, which is significantly lower than GCOW's 12.18% return. Both investments have delivered pretty close results over the past 10 years, with NOBL having a 9.51% annualized return and GCOW not far ahead at 9.91%.

NOBL

• 1D: -0.17%
• 1M: 1.01%
• YTD: 3.51%
• 6M: 3.45%
• 1Y: 9.00%
• 3Y*: 8.01%
• 5Y*: 5.03%
• 10Y*: 9.51%

GCOW

• 1D: -0.56%
• 1M: 0.09%
• YTD: 12.18%
• 6M: 13.23%
• 1Y: 27.12%
• 3Y*: 17.41%
• 5Y*: 12.34%
• 10Y*: 9.91%

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

NOBL vs. GCOW - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
NOBL ProShares S&P 500 Dividend Aristocrats ETF	3.51%	6.84%	6.72%	8.09%	-6.52%	25.46%	8.35%	27.39%	-3.26%	21.02%
GCOW Pacer Global Cash Cows Dividend ETF	12.18%	27.34%	3.52%	13.95%	5.49%	14.58%	-4.33%	17.81%	-7.99%	20.71%

Correlation

The correlation between NOBL and GCOW is 0.64, 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	0.64
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.67
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.70
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.73
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 24, 2016	0.73

The correlation between NOBL and GCOW has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.64 to 0.73 - a consistent structural relationship.

NOBL vs. GCOW - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	NOBL	GCOW
Consumer Defensive	23.5%	17.1%
Industrials	20.3%	12.4%
Financial Services	12.4%	-
Basic Materials	10.9%	7.3%
Healthcare	9.7%	14.6%
Utilities	6.4%	4.1%
Consumer Cyclical	5.1%	4.6%
Real Estate	4.6%	-
Technology	3.6%	0.9%
Energy	3.4%	24.4%
Communication Services	-	14.6%

Return for Risk

NOBL vs. GCOW — Risk / Return Rank

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

NOBL

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

GCOW

GCOW Risk / Return Rank: 79
GCOW Sharpe Ratio Rank: 76
GCOW Sortino Ratio Rank: 79
GCOW Omega Ratio Rank: 72
GCOW Calmar Ratio Rank: 90
GCOW Martin Ratio Rank: 77

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.

NOBL vs. GCOW - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ProShares S&P 500 Dividend Aristocrats ETF (NOBL) 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.

	NOBL	GCOW	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.80	2.52	-1.72
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.24	3.63	-2.38
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.14	1.44	-0.30
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.99	5.71	-4.72
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	2.58	15.05	-12.47
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

NOBL vs. GCOW - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current NOBL Sharpe Ratio is 0.80, which is lower than the GCOW Sharpe Ratio of 2.52. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of NOBL 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

	NOBL	GCOW	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.80	2.52	-1.72
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.35	0.92	-0.57
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.57	0.61	-0.04
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.64	0.59	+0.06

Drawdowns

NOBL vs. GCOW - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum NOBL drawdown since its inception was -35.43%, smaller than the maximum GCOW drawdown of -37.64%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for NOBL and GCOW.

Drawdown Indicators

	NOBL	GCOW	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-35.43%	-37.64%	+2.21%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-9.11%	-4.77%	-4.34%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-15.36%	-12.35%	-3.01%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-17.92%	-21.48%	+3.56%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-35.43%	-37.64%	+2.21%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-5.99%	-2.73%	-3.26%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.48%	-5.84%	+2.36%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.50%	1.81%	+1.69%

Volatility

NOBL vs. GCOW - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for ProShares S&P 500 Dividend Aristocrats ETF (NOBL) is 2.36%, while Pacer Global Cash Cows Dividend ETF (GCOW) has a volatility of 2.85%. This indicates that NOBL experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than GCOW based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	NOBL	GCOW	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.36%	2.85%	-0.49%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	8.00%	7.99%	+0.01%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	11.33%	10.81%	+0.52%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	14.38%	13.49%	+0.89%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	16.60%	16.20%	+0.40%

NOBL vs. GCOW - Expense Ratio Comparison

NOBL has a 0.35% expense ratio, which is lower than GCOW's 0.60% expense ratio.

Dividends

NOBL vs. GCOW - Dividend Comparison

NOBL's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.12%, less than GCOW's 4.43% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
GCOW Pacer Global Cash Cows Dividend ETF	4.43%	4.06%	5.14%	5.28%	4.39%	4.23%	4.12%	4.40%	3.94%	2.79%	1.95%	0.00%
NOBL ProShares S&P 500 Dividend Aristocrats ETF	2.12%	2.14%	2.05%	2.09%	1.94%	1.89%	2.14%	1.89%	2.37%	1.74%	2.13%	2.02%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both NOBL and GCOW in my portfolio?

NOBL and GCOW have a correlation of 0.64, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, NOBL or GCOW?

GCOW has higher volatility (2.85%) compared to NOBL (2.36%). In terms of maximum drawdown, NOBL dropped -35.43% vs GCOW's -37.64%.

Which ETF is better, NOBL or GCOW?

On 10-year performance, GCOW leads with 9.91% vs 9.51% for NOBL. On fees, NOBL is cheaper at 0.35% per year. On volatility, NOBL has been the lower-risk option at 2.36%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, NOBL or GCOW?

Over the 10-year period, GCOW has performed better with a 9.91% return vs 9.51%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, NOBL or GCOW?

NOBL is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for GCOW.

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

GCOW has the higher dividend yield at 4.43%, compared with 2.12% for NOBL.

What is the main difference between NOBL and GCOW?

NOBL is categorized as Dividend, while GCOW is Large Cap Value Equities. NOBL tracks S&P 500 Dividend Aristocrats Index, while GCOW tracks Pacer Global Cash Cows Dividends Index. They also come from different issuers: ProShares and Pacer. Their fees differ too: 0.35% for NOBL and 0.60% for GCOW.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

GCOW currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.52 vs 0.80), 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.