PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
QDF vs. COWZ
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

QDF vs. COWZ

Last updated Jun 23, 2026

QDF (FlexShares Quality Dividend Index Fund) and COWZ (Pacer US Cash Cows 100 ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - QDF is a Large Cap Value Equities fund tracking the Northern Trust Quality Dividend Index, while COWZ is a Mid Cap Value Equities fund tracking the Pacer US Cash Cows 100 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, QDF returned 12.35%/yr vs 9.90%/yr for COWZ. Their correlation of 0.84 suggests significant overlap in exposure. QDF charges 0.37%/yr vs 0.49%/yr for COWZ.

Performance

QDF vs. COWZ - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in FlexShares Quality Dividend Index Fund (QDF) and Pacer US Cash Cows 100 ETF (COWZ). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, QDF achieves a 11.19% return, which is significantly higher than COWZ's 2.67% return.

QDF

1D
-0.08%
1M
0.95%
YTD
11.19%
6M
10.56%
1Y
28.48%
3Y*
19.05%
5Y*
12.35%
10Y*
12.49%

COWZ

1D
-0.52%
1M
-4.28%
YTD
2.67%
6M
1.89%
1Y
15.09%
3Y*
12.16%
5Y*
9.90%
10Y*
—
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

QDF vs. COWZ - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
QDF
FlexShares Quality Dividend Index Fund		11.19%16.58%16.95%19.71%-12.13%26.65%4.86%25.71%-7.97%17.42%
COWZ
Pacer US Cash Cows 100 ETF		2.67%8.98%10.64%14.73%0.19%42.57%11.65%23.41%-10.05%20.22%

Correlation

The correlation between QDF and COWZ is 0.62, 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

0.62

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.73

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.80

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 19, 2016

0.84

Over the past year, the correlation between QDF and COWZ has dropped to 0.62 - well below their long-term average of 0.84, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

QDF vs. COWZ - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
QDF
COWZ

Technology

39.5%
16.0%

Financial Services

11.5%

-

Healthcare

9.6%
21.8%

Industrials

9.1%
8.4%

Communication Services

7.2%
10.4%

Consumer Cyclical

6.4%
11.7%

Consumer Defensive

5.7%
10.9%

Real Estate

5.4%

-

Energy

3.4%
16.9%

Utilities

1.8%

-

Basic Materials

0.4%
3.7%

Technology

QDF
39.5%
COWZ
16.0%

Financial Services

QDF
11.5%
COWZ

-

Healthcare

QDF
9.6%
COWZ
21.8%

Industrials

QDF
9.1%
COWZ
8.4%

Communication Services

QDF
7.2%
COWZ
10.4%

Consumer Cyclical

QDF
6.4%
COWZ
11.7%

Consumer Defensive

QDF
5.7%
COWZ
10.9%

Real Estate

QDF
5.4%
COWZ

-

Energy

QDF
3.4%
COWZ
16.9%

Utilities

QDF
1.8%
COWZ

-

Basic Materials

QDF
0.4%
COWZ
3.7%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.

FlexShares Quality Dividend Index Fund

Pacer US Cash Cows 100 ETF

Often compared with QDF:
QDF vs. QDEFQDF vs. SCHDQDF vs. DGRWQDF vs. QQQQDF vs. FDVVQDF vs. VOOQDF vs. SPHD
Often compared with COWZ:
COWZ vs. VOOCOWZ vs. VFLOCOWZ vs. SCHDCOWZ vs. GCOWCOWZ vs. COWGCOWZ vs. CALFCOWZ vs. VOOV

Return for Risk

QDF vs. COWZ — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
QDF
QDF Risk / Return Rank: 7878
Overall Rank
QDF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7777
Sharpe Ratio Rank
QDF Sortino Ratio Rank: 7878
Sortino Ratio Rank
QDF Omega Ratio Rank: 7777
Omega Ratio Rank
QDF Calmar Ratio Rank: 7474
Calmar Ratio Rank
QDF Martin Ratio Rank: 8181
Martin Ratio Rank
COWZ
COWZ Risk / Return Rank: 4343
Overall Rank
COWZ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3838
Sharpe Ratio Rank
COWZ Sortino Ratio Rank: 3939
Sortino Ratio Rank
COWZ Omega Ratio Rank: 3636
Omega Ratio Rank
COWZ Calmar Ratio Rank: 5353
Calmar Ratio Rank
COWZ Martin Ratio Rank: 4747
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

QDF vs. COWZ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for FlexShares Quality Dividend Index Fund (QDF) and Pacer US Cash Cows 100 ETF (COWZ). 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.

QDFCOWZDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
2.39
1.33

+1.06

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
3.32
1.97

+1.34

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.44

1.24

+0.20

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.62

2.54

+1.08

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

15.61

7.69

+7.92

QDF vs. COWZ - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current QDF Sharpe Ratio is 2.39, which is higher than the COWZ Sharpe Ratio of 1.33. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of QDF and COWZ, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Loading charts...

Drawdowns

QDF vs. COWZ - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QDF drawdown since its inception was -36.67%, smaller than the maximum COWZ drawdown of -38.63%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QDF and COWZ.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

QDFCOWZDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-36.67%

-38.63%

+1.96%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-7.90%

-5.95%

-1.95%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-18.01%

-22.00%

+3.99%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-22.06%

-22.00%

-0.06%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-36.67%

—

—

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.33%

-5.95%

+5.62%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-3.64%

-4.80%

+1.16%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.83%

1.97%

-0.14%

Volatility

QDF vs. COWZ - Volatility Comparison

FlexShares Quality Dividend Index Fund (QDF) and Pacer US Cash Cows 100 ETF (COWZ) have volatilities of 4.05% and 3.91%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

QDFCOWZDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.05%

3.91%

+0.14%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

9.32%

7.52%

+1.80%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

12.00%

11.39%

+0.61%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

15.65%

17.64%

-1.99%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

17.42%

19.90%

-2.48%

QDF vs. COWZ - Expense Ratio Comparison

QDF has a 0.37% expense ratio, which is lower than COWZ's 0.49% expense ratio.

Dividends

QDF vs. COWZ - Dividend Comparison

QDF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.51%, less than COWZ's 2.01% yield.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
COWZ
Pacer US Cash Cows 100 ETF		2.01%2.19%1.82%1.92%1.96%1.48%2.54%1.96%1.67%1.95%0.13%0.00%
QDF
FlexShares Quality Dividend Index Fund		1.51%1.65%1.93%2.19%2.45%1.90%2.38%3.05%4.29%2.70%3.07%3.04%

Frequently Asked Questions

QDF and COWZ have a correlation of 0.62, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

QDF has higher volatility (4.05%) compared to COWZ (3.91%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QDF dropped -36.67% vs COWZ's -38.63%.

On 5-year performance, QDF leads with 12.35% vs 9.90% for COWZ. On fees, QDF is cheaper at 0.37% per year. On volatility, COWZ has been the lower-risk option at 3.91%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 5-year period, QDF has performed better with a 12.35% return vs 9.90%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

QDF is cheaper with a 0.37% expense ratio, compared with 0.49% for COWZ.

COWZ has the higher dividend yield at 2.01%, compared with 1.51% for QDF.

QDF is categorized as Large Cap Value Equities, while COWZ is Mid Cap Value Equities. QDF tracks Northern Trust Quality Dividend Index, while COWZ tracks Pacer US Cash Cows 100 Index. They also come from different issuers: FlexShares and Pacer. Their fees differ too: 0.37% for QDF and 0.49% for COWZ.

QDF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.39 vs 1.33), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for QDF and COWZ

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