PEMX vs. ECOW

Last updated Aug 2, 2026

PEMX (Putnam Emerging Markets Ex-China ETF) and ECOW (Pacer Emerging Markets Cash Cows 100 ETF) are both Emerging Markets Equities funds. PEMX is actively managed, while ECOW is passively managed. Over the past 3 years, PEMX returned 28.43%/yr vs 16.24%/yr for ECOW. Their 0.63 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. PEMX charges 0.85%/yr vs 0.70%/yr for ECOW.

Performance

PEMX vs. ECOW - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Putnam Emerging Markets Ex-China ETF (PEMX) 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, PEMX achieves a 26.42% return, which is significantly higher than ECOW's 13.04% return.

PEMX

• 1D: 1.09%
• 1M: -7.11%
• 6M: 15.00%
• YTD: 26.42%
• 1Y: 48.11%
• 3Y*: 28.43%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 29.45%

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
PEMX Putnam Emerging Markets Ex-China ETF	$78.06K	$81.41K	$258.35K

PEMX vs. ECOW - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
PEMX Putnam Emerging Markets Ex-China ETF	26.42%	34.01%	17.21%	15.13%
ECOW Pacer Emerging Markets Cash Cows 100 ETF	13.04%	32.50%	3.17%	11.56%

Correlation

The correlation between PEMX and ECOW is 0.68, 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.	0.68
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history.	0.63
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 18, 2023	0.63

The correlation between PEMX and ECOW has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.63 to 0.68 - a consistent structural relationship.

PEMX vs. ECOW - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	PEMX	ECOW
Technology	49.1%	4.2%
Financial Services	24.1%	-
Industrials	6.1%	10.7%
Communication Services	6.0%	15.2%
Consumer Cyclical	3.8%	13.9%
Utilities	3.7%	6.9%
Basic Materials	1.5%	11.2%
Healthcare	1.4%	3.7%
Consumer Defensive	1.0%	11.6%
Energy	0.9%	10.4%
Real Estate	-	-

Return for Risk

PEMX vs. ECOW — Risk / Return Rank

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

PEMX

PEMX Risk / Return Rank: 73
PEMX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 77
PEMX Sortino Ratio Rank: 70
PEMX Omega Ratio Rank: 76
PEMX Calmar Ratio Rank: 72
PEMX Martin Ratio Rank: 73

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.

PEMX vs. ECOW - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Putnam Emerging Markets Ex-China ETF (PEMX) 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.

	PEMX	ECOW	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.75	2.02	-0.27
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.27	2.74	-0.47
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.31	1.37	-0.05
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.50	3.56	-1.06
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	9.02	9.38	-0.37

PEMX vs. ECOW - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current PEMX Sharpe Ratio is 1.75, which is comparable to the ECOW Sharpe Ratio of 2.02. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of PEMX 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

PEMX vs. ECOW - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PEMX drawdown since its inception was -19.04%, smaller than the maximum ECOW drawdown of -40.27%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PEMX and ECOW.

Drawdown Indicators

	PEMX	ECOW	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-19.04%	-40.27%	+21.23%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-19.04%	-8.35%	-10.69%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-19.04%	-18.77%	-0.27%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-33.30%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-14.50%	-3.58%	-10.92%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.11%	-10.94%	+7.83%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	5.27%	3.16%	+2.11%

Volatility

PEMX vs. ECOW - Volatility Comparison

Putnam Emerging Markets Ex-China ETF (PEMX) has a higher volatility of 10.79% compared to Pacer Emerging Markets Cash Cows 100 ETF (ECOW) at 3.51%. This indicates that PEMX'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

	PEMX	ECOW	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	10.79%	3.51%	+7.28%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	25.23%	11.99%	+13.24%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	27.22%	14.81%	+12.41%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	20.23%	17.73%	+2.50%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	20.23%	20.04%	+0.19%

PEMX vs. ECOW - Expense Ratio Comparison

PEMX has a 0.85% expense ratio, which is higher than ECOW's 0.70% expense ratio.

Dividends

PEMX vs. ECOW - Dividend Comparison

PEMX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.54%, more 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%
PEMX Putnam Emerging Markets Ex-China ETF	5.54%	7.00%	5.00%	0.72%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both PEMX and ECOW in my portfolio?

PEMX and ECOW have a correlation of 0.68, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, PEMX or ECOW?

PEMX has higher volatility (10.79%) compared to ECOW (3.51%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PEMX dropped -19.04% vs ECOW's -40.27%.

Which ETF is better, PEMX or ECOW?

On 3-year performance, PEMX leads with 28.43% 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, PEMX or ECOW?

Over the 3-year period, PEMX has performed better with a 28.43% return vs 16.24%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, PEMX or ECOW?

ECOW is cheaper with a 0.70% expense ratio, compared with 0.85% for PEMX.

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

PEMX has the higher dividend yield at 5.54%, compared with 4.44% for ECOW.

What is the main difference between PEMX and ECOW?

They also come from different issuers: Putnam and Pacer. Their fees differ too: 0.85% for PEMX and 0.70% for ECOW.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

ECOW currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.02 vs 1.75), 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.