OAEM vs. ECOW

Last updated Aug 2, 2026

OAEM (OneAscent Emerging Markets ETF) and ECOW (Pacer Emerging Markets Cash Cows 100 ETF) are both Emerging Markets Equities funds. OAEM is actively managed, while ECOW is passively managed. Over the past 3 years, OAEM returned 18.13%/yr vs 16.24%/yr for ECOW. Their 0.71 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. OAEM charges 1.25%/yr vs 0.70%/yr for ECOW.

Performance

OAEM vs. ECOW - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in OneAscent Emerging Markets ETF (OAEM) and Pacer Emerging Markets Cash Cows 100 ETF (ECOW). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, OAEM achieves a 26.54% return, which is significantly higher than ECOW's 13.04% return.

OAEM

• 1D: 0.83%
• 1M: -2.87%
• 6M: 13.83%
• YTD: 26.54%
• 1Y: 43.91%
• 3Y*: 18.13%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 18.43%

ECOW

• 1D: -0.60%
• 1M: 3.22%
• 6M: 5.35%
• YTD: 13.04%
• 1Y: 29.31%
• 3Y*: 16.24%
• 5Y*: 7.26%
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 7.35%

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
ECOW Pacer Emerging Markets Cash Cows 100 ETF	$617.95K	$706.50K	$1.39M
OAEM OneAscent Emerging Markets ETF	$452.20K	$547.88K	$1.41M

OAEM vs. ECOW - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
OAEM OneAscent Emerging Markets ETF	26.54%	26.67%	0.43%	17.97%	1.40%
ECOW Pacer Emerging Markets Cash Cows 100 ETF	13.04%	32.50%	3.17%	15.79%	1.14%

Correlation

The correlation between OAEM and ECOW is 0.69, which is moderate. They have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently, sharing some price drivers without tracking each other closely.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.69
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history.	0.69
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 15, 2022	0.71

The correlation between OAEM and ECOW has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.69 to 0.71 - a consistent structural relationship.

OAEM vs. ECOW - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	OAEM	ECOW
Technology	45.0%	4.2%
Industrials	15.8%	10.7%
Financial Services	15.7%	-
Basic Materials	7.1%	11.2%
Consumer Cyclical	5.1%	13.9%
Real Estate	3.9%	-
Energy	3.1%	10.4%
Consumer Defensive	2.1%	11.6%
Communication Services	1.3%	15.2%
Utilities	0.9%	6.9%
Healthcare	-	3.7%

Return for Risk

OAEM vs. ECOW — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

OAEM

OAEM Risk / Return Rank: 70
OAEM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 68
OAEM Sortino Ratio Rank: 60
OAEM Omega Ratio Rank: 68
OAEM Calmar Ratio Rank: 79
OAEM Martin Ratio Rank: 74

ECOW

ECOW Risk / Return Rank: 83
ECOW Sharpe Ratio Rank: 86
ECOW Sortino Ratio Rank: 83
ECOW Omega Ratio Rank: 84
ECOW Calmar Ratio Rank: 88
ECOW Martin Ratio Rank: 75

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.

OAEM vs. ECOW - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for OneAscent Emerging Markets ETF (OAEM) and Pacer Emerging Markets Cash Cows 100 ETF (ECOW). 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.

	OAEM	ECOW	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.57	2.02	-0.45
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.06	2.74	-0.68
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.29	1.37	-0.08
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.84	3.56	-0.72
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	9.24	9.38	-0.14

OAEM vs. ECOW - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current OAEM Sharpe Ratio is 1.57, which is comparable to the ECOW Sharpe Ratio of 2.02. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of OAEM and ECOW, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

OAEM vs. ECOW - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum OAEM drawdown since its inception was -17.05%, smaller than the maximum ECOW drawdown of -40.27%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for OAEM and ECOW.

Drawdown Indicators

	OAEM	ECOW	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-17.05%	-40.27%	+23.22%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-15.09%	-8.35%	-6.74%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-17.05%	-18.77%	+1.72%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-33.30%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-10.37%	-3.58%	-6.79%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.98%	-10.94%	+6.96%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.64%	3.16%	+1.48%

Volatility

OAEM vs. ECOW - Volatility Comparison

OneAscent Emerging Markets ETF (OAEM) has a higher volatility of 10.55% compared to Pacer Emerging Markets Cash Cows 100 ETF (ECOW) at 3.51%. This indicates that OAEM's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than ECOW based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	OAEM	ECOW	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	10.55%	3.51%	+7.04%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	25.40%	11.99%	+13.41%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	27.41%	14.81%	+12.60%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	20.93%	17.73%	+3.20%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	20.93%	20.04%	+0.89%

OAEM vs. ECOW - Expense Ratio Comparison

OAEM has a 1.25% expense ratio, which is higher than ECOW's 0.70% expense ratio.

Dividends

OAEM vs. ECOW - Dividend Comparison

OAEM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.61%, less than ECOW's 4.44% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019
ECOW Pacer Emerging Markets Cash Cows 100 ETF	4.44%	5.20%	7.35%	5.46%	7.50%	4.39%	3.35%	8.08%
OAEM OneAscent Emerging Markets ETF	0.61%	0.77%	0.91%	1.63%	0.04%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both OAEM and ECOW in my portfolio?

OAEM and ECOW have a correlation of 0.69, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, OAEM or ECOW?

OAEM has higher volatility (10.55%) compared to ECOW (3.51%). In terms of maximum drawdown, OAEM dropped -17.05% vs ECOW's -40.27%.

Which ETF is better, OAEM or ECOW?

On 3-year performance, OAEM leads with 18.13% vs 16.24% for ECOW. On fees, ECOW is cheaper at 0.70% per year. On volatility, ECOW has been the lower-risk option at 3.51%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, OAEM or ECOW?

Over the 3-year period, OAEM has performed better with a 18.13% return vs 16.24%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, OAEM or ECOW?

ECOW is cheaper with a 0.70% expense ratio, compared with 1.25% for OAEM.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, OAEM or ECOW?

ECOW has the higher dividend yield at 4.44%, compared with 0.61% for OAEM.

What is the main difference between OAEM and ECOW?

They also come from different issuers: Oneascent and Pacer. Their fees differ too: 1.25% for OAEM and 0.70% for ECOW.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

ECOW currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.02 vs 1.57), 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.