QLV vs. COWZ
QLV (FlexShares US Quality Low Volatility Index Fund) and COWZ (Pacer US Cash Cows 100 ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - QLV is a Volatility Hedged Equity fund tracking the Northern Trust Quality Low Volatility 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, QLV returned 10.73%/yr vs 10.57%/yr for COWZ. A 0.70 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. QLV charges 0.22%/yr vs 0.49%/yr for COWZ.
Performance
QLV vs. COWZ - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, QLV achieves a 5.48% return, which is significantly lower than COWZ's 8.18% return.
QLV
- 1D
- -0.51%
- 1M
- 2.14%
- YTD
- 5.48%
- 6M
- 5.38%
- 1Y
- 14.06%
- 3Y*
- 15.15%
- 5Y*
- 10.73%
- 10Y*
- —
COWZ
- 1D
- -0.34%
- 1M
- 2.61%
- YTD
- 8.18%
- 6M
- 9.03%
- 1Y
- 22.23%
- 3Y*
- 14.44%
- 5Y*
- 10.57%
- 10Y*
- —
QLV vs. COWZ - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
QLV FlexShares US Quality Low Volatility Index Fund | 5.48% | 12.28% | 18.08% | 13.71% | -9.97% | 26.08% | 9.63% | 6.24% |
COWZ Pacer US Cash Cows 100 ETF | 8.18% | 8.98% | 10.64% | 14.73% | 0.19% | 42.57% | 11.65% | 7.01% |
Correlation
The correlation between QLV and COWZ is 0.68, 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 | 0.68 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.67 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.70 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 17, 2019 | 0.70 |
The correlation between QLV and COWZ has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.67 to 0.70 - a consistent structural relationship.
QLV vs. COWZ - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
QLV
COWZ
Technology
Healthcare
Financial Services
-
Consumer Defensive
Communication Services
Consumer Cyclical
Utilities
-
Industrials
Energy
Basic Materials
Real Estate
-
Technology
QLV
COWZ
Healthcare
QLV
COWZ
Financial Services
QLV
COWZ
-
Consumer Defensive
QLV
COWZ
Communication Services
QLV
COWZ
Consumer Cyclical
QLV
COWZ
Utilities
QLV
COWZ
-
Industrials
QLV
COWZ
Energy
QLV
COWZ
Basic Materials
QLV
COWZ
Real Estate
QLV
COWZ
-
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
QLV vs. COWZ — Risk / Return Rank
QLV
COWZ
QLV vs. COWZ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for FlexShares US Quality Low Volatility Index Fund (QLV) 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.
| QLV | COWZ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | 1.85 | 2.02 | -0.17 |
Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | 2.68 | 2.98 | -0.30 |
Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.32 | 1.36 | -0.03 |
Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.28 | 4.46 | -2.18 |
Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 9.69 | 12.19 | -2.50 |
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
| QLV | COWZ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.85 | 2.02 | -0.17 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.85 | 0.60 | +0.25 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.69 | 0.65 | +0.04 |
Drawdowns
QLV vs. COWZ - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum QLV drawdown since its inception was -33.71%, smaller than the maximum COWZ drawdown of -38.63%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QLV and COWZ.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| QLV | COWZ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -33.71% | -38.63% | +4.92% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -6.19% | -5.00% | -1.19% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -12.05% | -22.00% | +9.95% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -17.93% | -22.00% | +4.07% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.81% | -0.91% | +0.10% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -4.00% | -4.81% | +0.81% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.45% | 1.83% | -0.38% |
Volatility
QLV vs. COWZ - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for FlexShares US Quality Low Volatility Index Fund (QLV) is 1.61%, while Pacer US Cash Cows 100 ETF (COWZ) has a volatility of 2.56%. This indicates that QLV experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than COWZ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| QLV | COWZ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 1.61% | 2.56% | -0.95% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 5.34% | 7.12% | -1.78% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 7.65% | 11.13% | -3.48% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 12.64% | 17.63% | -4.99% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 16.57% | 19.93% | -3.36% |
QLV vs. COWZ - Expense Ratio Comparison
QLV has a 0.22% expense ratio, which is lower than COWZ's 0.49% expense ratio.
Dividends
QLV vs. COWZ - Dividend Comparison
QLV's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.52%, less than COWZ's 1.99% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
COWZ Pacer US Cash Cows 100 ETF | 1.99% | 2.19% | 1.82% | 1.92% | 1.96% | 1.48% | 2.54% | 1.96% | 1.67% | 1.95% | 0.13% |
QLV FlexShares US Quality Low Volatility Index Fund | 1.52% | 1.60% | 1.66% | 1.60% | 1.74% | 0.96% | 1.24% | 0.58% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
QLV and COWZ 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.
COWZ has higher volatility (2.56%) compared to QLV (1.61%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QLV dropped -33.71% vs COWZ's -38.63%.
On 5-year performance, QLV leads with 10.73% vs 10.57% for COWZ. On fees, QLV is cheaper at 0.22% per year. On volatility, QLV has been the lower-risk option at 1.61%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 5-year period, QLV has performed better with a 10.73% return vs 10.57%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
QLV is cheaper with a 0.22% expense ratio, compared with 0.49% for COWZ.
COWZ has the higher dividend yield at 1.99%, compared with 1.52% for QLV.
QLV is categorized as Volatility Hedged Equity, while COWZ is Mid Cap Value Equities. QLV tracks Northern Trust Quality Low Volatility Index, while COWZ tracks Pacer US Cash Cows 100 Index. They also come from different issuers: Northern Trust and Pacer. Their fees differ too: 0.22% for QLV and 0.49% for COWZ.
COWZ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.02 vs 1.85), 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 QLV 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