PAMC vs. GCOW

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

PAMC (Pacer Lunt MidCap Multi-Factor Alternator ETF) and GCOW (Pacer Global Cash Cows Dividend ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - PAMC is a Mid Cap Growth Equities fund tracking the Lunt Capital U.S. MidCap Multi-Factor Rotation 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 5 years, PAMC returned 9.24%/yr vs 11.72%/yr for GCOW. A 0.61 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. Both charge a 0.60% expense ratio.

Performance

PAMC vs. GCOW - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Pacer Lunt MidCap Multi-Factor Alternator ETF (PAMC) 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, PAMC achieves a 18.25% return, which is significantly higher than GCOW's 7.34% return.

PAMC

• 1D: -1.11%
• 1M: 3.39%
• YTD: 18.25%
• 6M: 15.73%
• 1Y: 29.68%
• 3Y*: 18.49%
• 5Y*: 9.24%
• 10Y*: —

GCOW

• 1D: 0.00%
• 1M: -6.00%
• YTD: 7.34%
• 6M: 7.32%
• 1Y: 21.14%
• 3Y*: 15.59%
• 5Y*: 11.72%
• 10Y*: 9.95%

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

PAMC vs. GCOW - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
PAMC Pacer Lunt MidCap Multi-Factor Alternator ETF	18.25%	1.54%	26.20%	19.30%	-12.15%	13.15%	34.86%
GCOW Pacer Global Cash Cows Dividend ETF	7.34%	27.34%	3.52%	13.95%	5.49%	14.58%	18.32%

Correlation

The correlation between PAMC and GCOW is 0.39, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.39
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.50
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.60
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 25, 2020	0.61

Over the past year, the correlation between PAMC and GCOW has dropped to 0.39 - well below their long-term average of 0.61, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

PAMC vs. GCOW - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	PAMC	GCOW
Industrials	25.8%	12.6%
Technology	16.1%	1.3%
Financial Services	15.8%	-
Consumer Cyclical	11.8%	4.8%
Energy	9.8%	22.9%
Basic Materials	5.6%	8.1%
Real Estate	4.0%	-
Consumer Defensive	3.8%	17.0%
Healthcare	3.4%	14.8%
Utilities	3.1%	4.0%
Communication Services	0.7%	14.5%

Return for Risk

PAMC vs. GCOW — Risk / Return Rank

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

PAMC

PAMC Risk / Return Rank: 55
PAMC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 49
PAMC Sortino Ratio Rank: 50
PAMC Omega Ratio Rank: 48
PAMC Calmar Ratio Rank: 63
PAMC Martin Ratio Rank: 64

GCOW

GCOW Risk / Return Rank: 60
GCOW Sharpe Ratio Rank: 60
GCOW Sortino Ratio Rank: 61
GCOW Omega Ratio Rank: 56
GCOW Calmar Ratio Rank: 64
GCOW Martin Ratio Rank: 61

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.

PAMC vs. GCOW - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Pacer Lunt MidCap Multi-Factor Alternator ETF (PAMC) 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.

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.

	PAMC	GCOW	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.58	1.91	-0.34
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.29	2.74	-0.46
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.29	1.33	-0.04
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.91	3.06	-0.15
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	10.77	10.42	+0.35

PAMC vs. GCOW - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current PAMC Sharpe Ratio is 1.58, which is comparable to the GCOW Sharpe Ratio of 1.91. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of PAMC 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.

Drawdowns

PAMC vs. GCOW - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PAMC drawdown since its inception was -27.04%, smaller than the maximum GCOW drawdown of -37.64%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PAMC and GCOW.

Drawdown Indicators

	PAMC	GCOW	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-27.04%	-37.64%	+10.60%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-10.24%	-6.93%	-3.31%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-26.07%	-12.35%	-13.72%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-26.61%	-21.48%	-5.13%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-37.64%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.11%	-6.93%	+5.82%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-7.41%	-5.83%	-1.58%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.76%	2.03%	+0.73%

Volatility

PAMC vs. GCOW - Volatility Comparison

Pacer Lunt MidCap Multi-Factor Alternator ETF (PAMC) has a higher volatility of 5.44% compared to Pacer Global Cash Cows Dividend ETF (GCOW) at 2.89%. This indicates that PAMC's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than GCOW based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	PAMC	GCOW	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.44%	2.89%	+2.55%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	14.37%	8.29%	+6.08%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	18.90%	11.09%	+7.81%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	20.40%	13.50%	+6.90%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	20.72%	16.03%	+4.69%

PAMC vs. GCOW - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both PAMC and GCOW have an expense ratio of 0.60%.

Dividends

PAMC vs. GCOW - Dividend Comparison

PAMC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.10%, less than GCOW's 4.90% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016
GCOW Pacer Global Cash Cows Dividend ETF	4.90%	4.06%	5.14%	5.28%	4.39%	4.23%	4.12%	4.40%	3.94%	2.79%	1.95%
PAMC Pacer Lunt MidCap Multi-Factor Alternator ETF	1.10%	1.11%	0.97%	0.69%	1.29%	0.36%	0.30%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both PAMC and GCOW in my portfolio?

PAMC and GCOW have a correlation of 0.39, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, PAMC or GCOW?

PAMC has higher volatility (5.44%) compared to GCOW (2.89%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PAMC dropped -27.04% vs GCOW's -37.64%.

Which ETF is better, PAMC or GCOW?

On 5-year performance, GCOW leads with 11.72% vs 9.24% for PAMC. Both ETFs have the same 0.60% expense ratio. On volatility, GCOW has been the lower-risk option at 2.89%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, PAMC or GCOW?

Over the 5-year period, GCOW has performed better with a 11.72% return vs 9.24%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, PAMC or GCOW?

PAMC and GCOW have the same expense ratio: 0.60% per year.

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

GCOW has the higher dividend yield at 4.90%, compared with 1.10% for PAMC.

What is the main difference between PAMC and GCOW?

PAMC is categorized as Mid Cap Growth Equities, while GCOW is Large Cap Value Equities. PAMC tracks Lunt Capital U.S. MidCap Multi-Factor Rotation Index, while GCOW tracks Pacer Global Cash Cows Dividends Index.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

GCOW currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.91 vs 1.58), 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.