PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
PALC vs. COWZ
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

PALC vs. COWZ - 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 Cash Cows 100 ETF (COWZ). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, PALC achieves a 11.39% return, which is significantly higher than COWZ's 8.18% return.


PALC

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

COWZ

1D
-0.34%
1M
2.61%
YTD
8.18%
6M
9.03%
1Y
22.23%
3Y*
14.44%
5Y*
10.57%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

PALC vs. COWZ - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020
PALC
Pacer Lunt Large Cap Multi-Factor Alternator ETF
11.39%7.28%21.24%17.52%-14.74%41.03%22.18%
COWZ
Pacer US Cash Cows 100 ETF
8.18%8.98%10.64%14.73%0.19%42.57%29.90%

Correlation

The correlation between PALC and COWZ is 0.66, 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

0.66

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.61

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.70

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 26, 2020

0.68

The correlation between PALC and COWZ has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.61 to 0.70 - a consistent structural relationship.

PALC vs. COWZ - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
PALC
COWZ

Financial Services

22.6%

-

Technology

15.2%
16.0%

Industrials

14.1%
8.4%

Healthcare

11.9%
21.8%

Energy

10.6%
16.9%

Consumer Defensive

10.6%
10.9%

Communication Services

6.2%
10.4%

Consumer Cyclical

4.9%
11.7%

Basic Materials

2.2%
3.7%

Utilities

1.5%

-

Real Estate

0.3%

-

Financial Services

PALC
22.6%
COWZ

-

Technology

PALC
15.2%
COWZ
16.0%

Industrials

PALC
14.1%
COWZ
8.4%

Healthcare

PALC
11.9%
COWZ
21.8%

Energy

PALC
10.6%
COWZ
16.9%

Consumer Defensive

PALC
10.6%
COWZ
10.9%

Communication Services

PALC
6.2%
COWZ
10.4%

Consumer Cyclical

PALC
4.9%
COWZ
11.7%

Basic Materials

PALC
2.2%
COWZ
3.7%

Utilities

PALC
1.5%
COWZ

-

Real Estate

PALC
0.3%
COWZ

-

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

PALC vs. COWZ — Risk / Return Rank

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

PALC
PALC Risk / Return Rank: 5252
Overall Rank
PALC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5454
Sharpe Ratio Rank
PALC Sortino Ratio Rank: 5555
Sortino Ratio Rank
PALC Omega Ratio Rank: 5151
Omega Ratio Rank
PALC Calmar Ratio Rank: 4949
Calmar Ratio Rank
PALC Martin Ratio Rank: 5353
Martin Ratio Rank

COWZ
COWZ Risk / Return Rank: 6565
Overall Rank
COWZ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5959
Sharpe Ratio Rank
COWZ Sortino Ratio Rank: 6262
Sortino Ratio Rank
COWZ Omega Ratio Rank: 5757
Omega Ratio Rank
COWZ Calmar Ratio Rank: 8383
Calmar Ratio Rank
COWZ Martin Ratio Rank: 6565
Martin Ratio Rank
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. COWZ - 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 Cash Cows 100 ETF (COWZ). 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.


PALCCOWZDifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

1.87

2.02

-0.15

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

2.65

2.98

-0.33

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

1.32

1.36

-0.04

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

2.42

4.46

-2.05

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

8.98

12.19

-3.21

PALC vs. COWZ - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current PALC Sharpe Ratio is 1.87, which is comparable to the COWZ Sharpe Ratio of 2.02. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of PALC and COWZ, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


PALCCOWZDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.87

2.02

-0.15

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.58

0.60

-0.02

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.98

0.65

+0.34

Drawdowns

PALC vs. COWZ - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PALC drawdown since its inception was -24.45%, smaller than the maximum COWZ drawdown of -38.63%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PALC and COWZ.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


PALCCOWZDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-24.45%

-38.63%

+14.18%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-8.94%

-5.00%

-3.94%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-17.39%

-22.00%

+4.61%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-24.45%

-22.00%

-2.45%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.38%

-0.91%

+0.53%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-6.33%

-4.81%

-1.52%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.40%

1.83%

+0.57%

Volatility

PALC vs. COWZ - Volatility Comparison

Pacer Lunt Large Cap Multi-Factor Alternator ETF (PALC) has a higher volatility of 2.95% compared to Pacer US Cash Cows 100 ETF (COWZ) at 2.56%. This indicates that PALC's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than COWZ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


PALCCOWZDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

2.95%

2.56%

+0.39%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

8.55%

7.12%

+1.43%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

11.58%

11.13%

+0.45%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

16.22%

17.63%

-1.41%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

17.07%

19.93%

-2.86%

PALC vs. COWZ - Expense Ratio Comparison

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


Dividends

PALC vs. COWZ - Dividend Comparison

PALC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.04%, less than COWZ's 1.99% yield.


PositionTTM2025202420232022202120202019201820172016
COWZ
Pacer US Cash Cows 100 ETF
1.99%2.19%1.82%1.92%1.96%1.48%2.54%1.96%1.67%1.95%0.13%
PALC
Pacer Lunt Large Cap Multi-Factor Alternator ETF
1.04%1.08%0.93%0.74%1.69%0.64%0.72%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


PALC and COWZ have a correlation of 0.66, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

PALC has higher volatility (2.95%) compared to COWZ (2.56%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PALC dropped -24.45% vs COWZ's -38.63%.

On 5-year performance, COWZ leads with 10.57% vs 9.40% for PALC. On fees, COWZ is cheaper at 0.49% per year. On volatility, COWZ has been the lower-risk option at 2.56%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 5-year period, COWZ has performed better with a 10.57% return vs 9.40%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

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

COWZ has the higher dividend yield at 1.99%, compared with 1.04% for PALC.

PALC is categorized as Large Cap Growth Equities, while COWZ is Mid Cap Value Equities. PALC tracks Lunt Capital U.S. Large Cap Multi-Factor Rotation Index, while COWZ tracks Pacer US Cash Cows 100 Index. Their fees differ too: 0.60% for PALC and 0.49% for COWZ.

COWZ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.02 vs 1.87), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for PALC and COWZ

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