PALC vs. COWG

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

PALC (Pacer Lunt Large Cap Multi-Factor Alternator ETF) and COWG (Pacer US Large Cap Cash Cows Growth Leaders ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - PALC is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund tracking the Lunt Capital U.S. Large Cap Multi-Factor Rotation Index, while COWG is a Mid Cap Growth Equities fund tracking the Pacer US Large Cap Cash Cows Growth Leaders Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, PALC returned 17.82%/yr vs 24.53%/yr for COWG. A 0.78 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. PALC charges 0.60%/yr vs 0.49%/yr for COWG.

Performance

PALC vs. COWG - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Pacer Lunt Large Cap Multi-Factor Alternator ETF (PALC) and Pacer US Large Cap Cash Cows Growth Leaders ETF (COWG). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, PALC achieves a 11.39% return, which is significantly lower than COWG's 12.50% return.

PALC

• 1D: -0.38%
• 1M: 6.95%
• YTD: 11.39%
• 6M: 12.77%
• 1Y: 21.51%
• 3Y*: 17.82%
• 5Y*: 9.40%
• 10Y*: —

COWG

• 1D: 0.07%
• 1M: 8.17%
• YTD: 12.50%
• 6M: 12.76%
• 1Y: 13.36%
• 3Y*: 24.53%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

PALC vs. COWG - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
PALC Pacer Lunt Large Cap Multi-Factor Alternator ETF	11.39%	7.28%	21.24%	17.52%	0.63%
COWG Pacer US Large Cap Cash Cows Growth Leaders ETF	12.50%	10.24%	34.99%	20.69%	-0.68%

Correlation

The correlation between PALC and COWG is 0.67, 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	0.67
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.77
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 23, 2022	0.78

The correlation between PALC and COWG shifts across timeframes, from 0.67 (1 year) to 0.78 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

PALC vs. COWG - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	PALC	COWG
Financial Services	22.6%	-
Technology	15.2%	48.5%
Industrials	14.1%	3.6%
Healthcare	11.9%	21.0%
Energy	10.6%	8.4%
Consumer Defensive	10.6%	2.0%
Communication Services	6.2%	5.2%
Consumer Cyclical	4.9%	3.2%
Basic Materials	2.2%	6.5%
Utilities	1.5%	1.5%
Real Estate	0.3%	-

Return for Risk

PALC vs. COWG — Risk / Return Rank

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

PALC

PALC Risk / Return Rank: 52
PALC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 54
PALC Sortino Ratio Rank: 55
PALC Omega Ratio Rank: 51
PALC Calmar Ratio Rank: 49
PALC Martin Ratio Rank: 53

COWG

COWG Risk / Return Rank: 24
COWG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 23
COWG Sortino Ratio Rank: 23
COWG Omega Ratio Rank: 22
COWG Calmar Ratio Rank: 26
COWG Martin Ratio Rank: 26

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.

PALC vs. COWG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Pacer Lunt Large Cap Multi-Factor Alternator ETF (PALC) and Pacer US Large Cap Cash Cows Growth Leaders ETF (COWG). 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.

	PALC	COWG	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	1.87	0.84	+1.02
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	2.65	1.24	+1.41
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.32	1.15	+0.17
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.42	1.24	+1.17
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	8.98	3.64	+5.33
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

PALC vs. COWG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current PALC Sharpe Ratio is 1.87, which is higher than the COWG Sharpe Ratio of 0.84. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of PALC and COWG, 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

	PALC	COWG	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.87	0.84	+1.02
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.58	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.98	1.18	-0.20

Drawdowns

PALC vs. COWG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PALC drawdown since its inception was -24.45%, roughly equal to the maximum COWG drawdown of -23.60%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PALC and COWG.

Drawdown Indicators

	PALC	COWG	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-24.45%	-23.60%	-0.85%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-8.94%	-10.79%	+1.85%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-17.39%	-23.60%	+6.21%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-24.45%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.38%	0.00%	-0.38%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-6.33%	-3.28%	-3.05%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.40%	3.67%	-1.27%

Volatility

PALC vs. COWG - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Pacer Lunt Large Cap Multi-Factor Alternator ETF (PALC) is 2.95%, while Pacer US Large Cap Cash Cows Growth Leaders ETF (COWG) has a volatility of 3.67%. This indicates that PALC experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than COWG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	PALC	COWG	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.95%	3.67%	-0.72%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	8.55%	12.01%	-3.46%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	11.58%	15.96%	-4.38%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	16.22%	19.11%	-2.89%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	17.07%	19.11%	-2.04%

PALC vs. COWG - Expense Ratio Comparison

PALC has a 0.60% expense ratio, which is higher than COWG's 0.49% expense ratio.

Dividends

PALC vs. COWG - Dividend Comparison

PALC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.04%, more than COWG's 0.30% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
COWG Pacer US Large Cap Cash Cows Growth Leaders ETF	0.30%	0.32%	0.40%	0.47%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
PALC Pacer Lunt Large Cap Multi-Factor Alternator ETF	1.04%	1.08%	0.93%	0.74%	1.69%	0.64%	0.72%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both PALC and COWG in my portfolio?

PALC and COWG have a correlation of 0.67, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, PALC or COWG?

COWG has higher volatility (3.67%) compared to PALC (2.95%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PALC dropped -24.45% vs COWG's -23.60%.

Which ETF is better, PALC or COWG?

On 3-year performance, COWG leads with 24.53% vs 17.82% for PALC. On fees, COWG is cheaper at 0.49% per year. On volatility, PALC has been the lower-risk option at 2.95%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, PALC or COWG?

Over the 3-year period, COWG has performed better with a 24.53% return vs 17.82%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, PALC or COWG?

COWG is cheaper with a 0.49% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for PALC.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, PALC or COWG?

PALC has the higher dividend yield at 1.04%, compared with 0.30% for COWG.

What is the main difference between PALC and COWG?

PALC is categorized as Large Cap Growth Equities, while COWG is Mid Cap Growth Equities. PALC tracks Lunt Capital U.S. Large Cap Multi-Factor Rotation Index, while COWG tracks Pacer US Large Cap Cash Cows Growth Leaders Index. Their fees differ too: 0.60% for PALC and 0.49% for COWG.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

PALC currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.87 vs 0.84), 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.