PSFF vs. GCOW
PSFF (Pacer Swan SOS Fund of Funds ETF) and GCOW (Pacer Global Cash Cows Dividend ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - PSFF is a Defined Outcome fund actively managed by Pacer, while GCOW is a Large Cap Value Equities fund tracking the Pacer Global Cash Cows Dividends Index. PSFF is actively managed, while GCOW is passively managed. Over the past 5 years, PSFF returned 9.43%/yr vs 12.34%/yr for GCOW. At a 0.49 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. PSFF charges 0.75%/yr vs 0.60%/yr for GCOW.
Performance
PSFF vs. GCOW - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, PSFF achieves a 5.72% return, which is significantly lower than GCOW's 12.18% return.
PSFF
- 1D
- -0.18%
- 1M
- 1.85%
- YTD
- 5.72%
- 6M
- 6.41%
- 1Y
- 14.89%
- 3Y*
- 13.03%
- 5Y*
- 9.43%
- 10Y*
- —
GCOW
- 1D
- -0.56%
- 1M
- 0.09%
- YTD
- 12.18%
- 6M
- 13.23%
- 1Y
- 27.12%
- 3Y*
- 17.41%
- 5Y*
- 12.34%
- 10Y*
- 9.91%
PSFF vs. GCOW - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
PSFF Pacer Swan SOS Fund of Funds ETF | 5.72% | 10.38% | 13.18% | 18.39% | -4.11% | 11.81% | 0.37% |
GCOW Pacer Global Cash Cows Dividend ETF | 12.18% | 27.34% | 3.52% | 13.95% | 5.49% | 14.58% | -0.26% |
Correlation
The correlation between PSFF and GCOW is 0.28, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.28 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.35 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.48 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 31, 2020 | 0.49 |
Over the past year, the correlation between PSFF and GCOW has dropped to 0.28 - well below their long-term average of 0.49, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.
PSFF vs. GCOW - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
PSFF
GCOW
Technology
Financial Services
-
Communication Services
Consumer Cyclical
Healthcare
Industrials
Consumer Defensive
Energy
Utilities
Real Estate
-
Basic Materials
Technology
PSFF
GCOW
Financial Services
PSFF
GCOW
-
Communication Services
PSFF
GCOW
Consumer Cyclical
PSFF
GCOW
Healthcare
PSFF
GCOW
Industrials
PSFF
GCOW
Consumer Defensive
PSFF
GCOW
Energy
PSFF
GCOW
Utilities
PSFF
GCOW
Real Estate
PSFF
GCOW
-
Basic Materials
PSFF
GCOW
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
PSFF vs. GCOW — Risk / Return Rank
PSFF
GCOW
PSFF vs. GCOW - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Pacer Swan SOS Fund of Funds ETF (PSFF) 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.
| PSFF | GCOW | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.04 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.20 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.47 | 1.44 | +0.03 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 4.08 | 5.71 | -1.64 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 20.44 | 15.05 | +5.39 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| PSFF | GCOW | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.49 | 2.52 | -0.04 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 1.03 | 0.92 | +0.11 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | — | 0.61 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 1.11 | 0.59 | +0.52 |
Drawdowns
PSFF vs. GCOW - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum PSFF drawdown since its inception was -10.78%, smaller than the maximum GCOW drawdown of -37.64%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PSFF and GCOW.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| PSFF | GCOW | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -10.78% | -37.64% | +26.86% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -3.67% | -4.77% | +1.10% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -10.78% | -12.35% | +1.57% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -10.78% | -21.48% | +10.70% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -37.64% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.18% | -2.73% | +2.55% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -1.60% | -5.84% | +4.24% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 0.73% | 1.81% | -1.08% |
Volatility
PSFF vs. GCOW - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Pacer Swan SOS Fund of Funds ETF (PSFF) is 1.02%, while Pacer Global Cash Cows Dividend ETF (GCOW) has a volatility of 2.85%. This indicates that PSFF experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than GCOW based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| PSFF | GCOW | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 1.02% | 2.85% | -1.83% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 4.54% | 7.99% | -3.45% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 6.08% | 10.81% | -4.73% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 9.22% | 13.49% | -4.27% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 9.10% | 16.20% | -7.10% |
PSFF vs. GCOW - Expense Ratio Comparison
PSFF has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is higher than GCOW's 0.60% expense ratio.
Dividends
PSFF vs. GCOW - Dividend Comparison
PSFF has not paid dividends to shareholders, while GCOW's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.43%.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
GCOW Pacer Global Cash Cows Dividend ETF | 4.43% | 4.06% | 5.14% | 5.28% | 4.39% | 4.23% | 4.12% | 4.40% | 3.94% | 2.79% | 1.95% |
PSFF Pacer Swan SOS Fund of Funds ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.01% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
PSFF and GCOW have a correlation of 0.28, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
GCOW has higher volatility (2.85%) compared to PSFF (1.02%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PSFF dropped -10.78% vs GCOW's -37.64%.
On 5-year performance, GCOW leads with 12.34% vs 9.43% for PSFF. On fees, GCOW is cheaper at 0.60% per year. On volatility, PSFF has been the lower-risk option at 1.02%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 5-year period, GCOW has performed better with a 12.34% return vs 9.43%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
GCOW is cheaper with a 0.60% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for PSFF.
GCOW has the higher dividend yield at 4.43%, compared with 0.00% for PSFF.
PSFF is categorized as Defined Outcome, while GCOW is Large Cap Value Equities. Their fees differ too: 0.75% for PSFF and 0.60% for GCOW.
GCOW currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.52 vs 2.49), 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.
Find the right allocation for PSFF and GCOW
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