PSCQ vs. COWG

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

PSCQ (Pacer Swan SOS Conservative (October) ETF) and COWG (Pacer US Large Cap Cash Cows Growth Leaders ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - PSCQ is a Options Trading fund actively managed by Pacer, while COWG is a Mid Cap Growth Equities fund tracking the Pacer US Large Cap Cash Cows Growth Leaders Index. PSCQ is actively managed, while COWG is passively managed. Over the past 3 years, PSCQ returned 12.70%/yr vs 24.56%/yr for COWG. A 0.79 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. PSCQ charges 0.60%/yr vs 0.49%/yr for COWG.

Performance

PSCQ vs. COWG - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Pacer Swan SOS Conservative (October) ETF (PSCQ) 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, PSCQ achieves a 5.54% return, which is significantly lower than COWG's 12.42% return.

PSCQ

• 1D: 0.12%
• 1M: 1.86%
• YTD: 5.54%
• 6M: 6.05%
• 1Y: 15.43%
• 3Y*: 12.70%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

COWG

• 1D: -0.07%
• 1M: 7.01%
• YTD: 12.42%
• 6M: 12.40%
• 1Y: 13.09%
• 3Y*: 24.56%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

PSCQ vs. COWG - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
PSCQ Pacer Swan SOS Conservative (October) ETF	5.54%	11.50%	9.72%	19.79%	0.42%
COWG Pacer US Large Cap Cash Cows Growth Leaders ETF	12.42%	10.24%	34.99%	20.69%	-0.68%

Correlation

The correlation between PSCQ and COWG is 0.80, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.80
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	0.79

The correlation between PSCQ and COWG has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.77 to 0.80 - a consistent structural relationship.

PSCQ vs. COWG - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	PSCQ	COWG
Technology	36.2%	48.5%
Financial Services	11.9%	-
Communication Services	10.9%	5.2%
Consumer Cyclical	10.1%	3.2%
Healthcare	8.4%	21.0%
Industrials	8.1%	3.6%
Consumer Defensive	4.9%	2.0%
Energy	3.5%	8.4%
Utilities	2.3%	1.5%
Real Estate	1.9%	-
Basic Materials	1.8%	6.5%

Return for Risk

PSCQ vs. COWG — Risk / Return Rank

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

PSCQ

PSCQ Risk / Return Rank: 82
PSCQ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 83
PSCQ Sortino Ratio Rank: 88
PSCQ Omega Ratio Rank: 88
PSCQ Calmar Ratio Rank: 69
PSCQ Martin Ratio Rank: 84

COWG

COWG Risk / Return Rank: 25
COWG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 24
COWG Sortino Ratio Rank: 24
COWG Omega Ratio Rank: 23
COWG Calmar Ratio Rank: 26
COWG Martin Ratio Rank: 27

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.

PSCQ vs. COWG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Pacer Swan SOS Conservative (October) ETF (PSCQ) 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.

	PSCQ	COWG	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.64	0.82	+1.81
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.91	1.22	+2.70
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.53	1.15	+0.39
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.38	1.22	+2.17
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	17.05	3.57	+13.48
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

PSCQ vs. COWG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current PSCQ Sharpe Ratio is 2.64, which is higher than the COWG Sharpe Ratio of 0.82. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of PSCQ 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

	PSCQ	COWG	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.64	0.82	+1.81
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.23	1.18	+0.05

Drawdowns

PSCQ vs. COWG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PSCQ drawdown since its inception was -9.92%, smaller than the maximum COWG drawdown of -23.60%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PSCQ and COWG.

Drawdown Indicators

	PSCQ	COWG	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-9.92%	-23.60%	+13.68%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-4.58%	-10.79%	+6.21%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-9.92%	-23.60%	+13.68%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.01%	-0.07%	+0.06%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.58%	-3.28%	+1.70%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.91%	3.67%	-2.76%

Volatility

PSCQ vs. COWG - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Pacer Swan SOS Conservative (October) ETF (PSCQ) is 0.80%, while Pacer US Large Cap Cash Cows Growth Leaders ETF (COWG) has a volatility of 3.63%. This indicates that PSCQ 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

	PSCQ	COWG	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.80%	3.63%	-2.83%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	4.45%	12.01%	-7.56%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	5.87%	15.94%	-10.07%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	7.56%	19.09%	-11.53%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	7.56%	19.09%	-11.53%

PSCQ vs. COWG - Expense Ratio Comparison

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

Dividends

PSCQ vs. COWG - Dividend Comparison

PSCQ has not paid dividends to shareholders, while COWG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.38%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023
COWG Pacer US Large Cap Cash Cows Growth Leaders ETF	0.38%	0.32%	0.40%	0.47%
PSCQ Pacer Swan SOS Conservative (October) ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both PSCQ and COWG in my portfolio?

PSCQ and COWG have a correlation of 0.80, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, PSCQ or COWG?

COWG has higher volatility (3.63%) compared to PSCQ (0.80%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PSCQ dropped -9.92% vs COWG's -23.60%.

Which ETF is better, PSCQ or COWG?

On 3-year performance, COWG leads with 24.56% vs 12.70% for PSCQ. On fees, COWG is cheaper at 0.49% per year. On volatility, PSCQ has been the lower-risk option at 0.80%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, PSCQ or COWG?

Over the 3-year period, COWG has performed better with a 24.56% return vs 12.70%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, PSCQ or COWG?

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

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

COWG has the higher dividend yield at 0.38%, compared with 0.00% for PSCQ.

What is the main difference between PSCQ and COWG?

PSCQ is categorized as Options Trading, while COWG is Mid Cap Growth Equities. Their fees differ too: 0.60% for PSCQ and 0.49% for COWG.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

PSCQ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.64 vs 0.82), 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.