PY vs. GCOW
PY (Principal Value ETF) and GCOW (Pacer Global Cash Cows Dividend ETF) are both Large Cap Value Equities funds. PY is actively managed, while GCOW is passively managed. Over the past 10 years, PY returned 10.73%/yr vs 9.91%/yr for GCOW. A 0.55 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. PY charges 0.15%/yr vs 0.60%/yr for GCOW.
Performance
PY vs. GCOW - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, PY achieves a 4.14% return, which is significantly lower than GCOW's 12.18% return. Over the past 10 years, PY has outperformed GCOW with an annualized return of 10.73%, while GCOW has yielded a comparatively lower 9.91% annualized return.
PY
- 1D
- -0.49%
- 1M
- 1.70%
- YTD
- 4.14%
- 6M
- 4.52%
- 1Y
- 14.24%
- 3Y*
- 13.22%
- 5Y*
- 7.32%
- 10Y*
- 10.73%
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%
PY vs. GCOW - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
PY Principal Value ETF | 4.14% | 7.74% | 16.79% | 9.11% | -5.10% | 34.83% | 2.71% | 26.87% | -13.34% | 18.87% |
GCOW Pacer Global Cash Cows Dividend ETF | 12.18% | 27.34% | 3.52% | 13.95% | 5.49% | 14.58% | -4.33% | 17.81% | -7.99% | 20.71% |
Correlation
The correlation between PY and GCOW is 0.58, 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 | 0.58 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.64 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.69 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.56 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 23, 2016 | 0.55 |
The correlation between PY and GCOW shifts across timeframes, from 0.55 (all time) to 0.69 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
PY vs. GCOW - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
PY
GCOW
Technology
Financial Services
-
Healthcare
Consumer Defensive
Consumer Cyclical
Industrials
Energy
Communication Services
Utilities
Basic Materials
Real Estate
-
Technology
PY
GCOW
Financial Services
PY
GCOW
-
Healthcare
PY
GCOW
Consumer Defensive
PY
GCOW
Consumer Cyclical
PY
GCOW
Industrials
PY
GCOW
Energy
PY
GCOW
Communication Services
PY
GCOW
Utilities
PY
GCOW
Basic Materials
PY
GCOW
Real Estate
PY
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
PY vs. GCOW — Risk / Return Rank
PY
GCOW
PY vs. GCOW - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Principal Value ETF (PY) 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.
| PY | GCOW | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -1.16 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -1.63 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.24 | 1.44 | -0.20 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.31 | 5.71 | -3.40 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 7.73 | 15.05 | -7.31 |
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
| PY | GCOW | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.36 | 2.52 | -1.16 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.47 | 0.92 | -0.45 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.54 | 0.61 | -0.08 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.54 | 0.59 | -0.05 |
Drawdowns
PY vs. GCOW - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum PY drawdown since its inception was -45.44%, which is greater than GCOW's maximum drawdown of -37.64%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PY and GCOW.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| PY | GCOW | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -45.44% | -37.64% | -7.80% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -6.20% | -4.77% | -1.43% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -17.84% | -12.35% | -5.49% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -17.84% | -21.48% | +3.64% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -45.44% | -37.64% | -7.80% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -1.00% | -2.73% | +1.73% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -5.05% | -5.84% | +0.79% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.85% | 1.81% | +0.04% |
Volatility
PY vs. GCOW - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Principal Value ETF (PY) is 2.28%, while Pacer Global Cash Cows Dividend ETF (GCOW) has a volatility of 2.85%. This indicates that PY 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
| PY | GCOW | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 2.28% | 2.85% | -0.57% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 7.28% | 7.99% | -0.71% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 10.53% | 10.81% | -0.28% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 15.77% | 13.49% | +2.28% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 20.07% | 16.20% | +3.87% |
PY vs. GCOW - Expense Ratio Comparison
PY has a 0.15% expense ratio, which is lower than GCOW's 0.60% expense ratio.
Dividends
PY vs. GCOW - Dividend Comparison
PY's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.13%, less than GCOW's 4.43% yield.
| 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% |
PY Principal Value ETF | 2.13% | 2.14% | 2.22% | 2.68% | 3.02% | 2.83% | 2.95% | 2.25% | 2.34% | 1.68% | 1.85% |
Frequently Asked Questions
PY and GCOW have a correlation of 0.58, 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 PY (2.28%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PY dropped -45.44% vs GCOW's -37.64%.
On 10-year performance, PY leads with 10.73% vs 9.91% for GCOW. On fees, PY is cheaper at 0.15% per year. On volatility, PY has been the lower-risk option at 2.28%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 10-year period, PY has performed better with a 10.73% return vs 9.91%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
PY is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for GCOW.
GCOW has the higher dividend yield at 4.43%, compared with 2.13% for PY.
They also come from different issuers: Principal and Pacer. Their fees differ too: 0.15% for PY and 0.60% for GCOW.
GCOW currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.52 vs 1.36), 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 PY 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