RFEM vs. ECOW

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

RFEM (First Trust RiverFront Dynamic Emerging Markets ETF) and ECOW (Pacer Emerging Markets Cash Cows 100 ETF) are both Emerging Markets Equities funds. RFEM is actively managed, while ECOW is passively managed. Over the past 5 years, RFEM returned 8.62%/yr vs 5.74%/yr for ECOW. A 0.70 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. RFEM charges 0.95%/yr vs 0.70%/yr for ECOW.

Performance

RFEM vs. ECOW - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in First Trust RiverFront Dynamic Emerging Markets ETF (RFEM) and Pacer Emerging Markets Cash Cows 100 ETF (ECOW). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, RFEM achieves a 18.11% return, which is significantly higher than ECOW's 8.95% return.

RFEM

• 1D: -3.04%
• 1M: 0.28%
• YTD: 18.11%
• 6M: 18.72%
• 1Y: 36.93%
• 3Y*: 22.77%
• 5Y*: 8.62%
• 10Y*: 9.39%

ECOW

• 1D: -0.95%
• 1M: -3.09%
• YTD: 8.95%
• 6M: 8.43%
• 1Y: 30.63%
• 3Y*: 17.90%
• 5Y*: 5.74%
• 10Y*: —

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

RFEM vs. ECOW - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019
RFEM First Trust RiverFront Dynamic Emerging Markets ETF	18.11%	27.71%	10.85%	20.78%	-19.05%	0.97%	8.19%	6.45%
ECOW Pacer Emerging Markets Cash Cows 100 ETF	8.95%	32.50%	3.17%	15.79%	-19.28%	7.47%	-2.51%	10.37%

Correlation

The correlation between RFEM and ECOW is 0.77, 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	0.77
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.79
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.78
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 6, 2019	0.70

The correlation between RFEM and ECOW has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.70 to 0.79 - a consistent structural relationship.

RFEM vs. ECOW - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	RFEM	ECOW
Technology	36.3%	10.3%
Financial Services	21.0%	-
Consumer Cyclical	12.7%	10.7%
Industrials	8.0%	15.0%
Energy	5.9%	9.8%
Communication Services	5.0%	15.1%
Basic Materials	3.9%	8.4%
Consumer Defensive	2.9%	9.1%
Healthcare	2.4%	0.9%
Utilities	1.3%	6.2%
Real Estate	0.7%	-

Return for Risk

RFEM vs. ECOW — Risk / Return Rank

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

RFEM

RFEM Risk / Return Rank: 69
RFEM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 69
RFEM Sortino Ratio Rank: 65
RFEM Omega Ratio Rank: 69
RFEM Calmar Ratio Rank: 69
RFEM Martin Ratio Rank: 73

ECOW

ECOW Risk / Return Rank: 69
ECOW Sharpe Ratio Rank: 69
ECOW Sortino Ratio Rank: 65
ECOW Omega Ratio Rank: 68
ECOW Calmar Ratio Rank: 77
ECOW Martin Ratio Rank: 68

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.

RFEM vs. ECOW - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for First Trust RiverFront Dynamic Emerging Markets ETF (RFEM) and Pacer Emerging Markets Cash Cows 100 ETF (ECOW). 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.

	RFEM	ECOW	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.05	2.08	-0.04
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.73	2.82	-0.08
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.38	1.38	0.00
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.19	3.69	-0.50
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	12.49	11.56	+0.93

RFEM vs. ECOW - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RFEM Sharpe Ratio is 2.05, which is comparable to the ECOW Sharpe Ratio of 2.08. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RFEM and ECOW, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

RFEM vs. ECOW - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RFEM drawdown since its inception was -42.22%, roughly equal to the maximum ECOW drawdown of -40.27%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RFEM and ECOW.

Drawdown Indicators

	RFEM	ECOW	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-42.22%	-40.27%	-1.95%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-11.65%	-8.35%	-3.30%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-15.81%	-18.77%	+2.96%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-34.25%	-33.30%	-0.95%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-42.22%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-4.26%	-7.07%	+2.81%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-11.93%	-11.02%	-0.91%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.97%	2.66%	+0.31%

Volatility

RFEM vs. ECOW - Volatility Comparison

First Trust RiverFront Dynamic Emerging Markets ETF (RFEM) has a higher volatility of 8.40% compared to Pacer Emerging Markets Cash Cows 100 ETF (ECOW) at 5.40%. This indicates that RFEM's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than ECOW based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	RFEM	ECOW	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	8.40%	5.40%	+3.00%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	15.94%	11.78%	+4.16%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	18.14%	14.78%	+3.36%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	18.15%	17.75%	+0.40%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	19.85%	20.13%	-0.28%

RFEM vs. ECOW - Expense Ratio Comparison

RFEM has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is higher than ECOW's 0.70% expense ratio.

Dividends

RFEM vs. ECOW - Dividend Comparison

RFEM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.73%, less than ECOW's 4.61% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016
ECOW Pacer Emerging Markets Cash Cows 100 ETF	4.61%	5.20%	7.35%	5.46%	7.50%	4.39%	3.35%	8.08%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
RFEM First Trust RiverFront Dynamic Emerging Markets ETF	1.73%	1.98%	3.64%	3.28%	7.74%	3.21%	1.22%	3.75%	2.37%	1.62%	3.73%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both RFEM and ECOW in my portfolio?

RFEM and ECOW have a correlation of 0.77, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, RFEM or ECOW?

RFEM has higher volatility (8.40%) compared to ECOW (5.40%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RFEM dropped -42.22% vs ECOW's -40.27%.

Which ETF is better, RFEM or ECOW?

On 5-year performance, RFEM leads with 8.62% vs 5.74% for ECOW. On fees, ECOW is cheaper at 0.70% per year. On volatility, ECOW has been the lower-risk option at 5.40%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, RFEM or ECOW?

Over the 5-year period, RFEM has performed better with a 8.62% return vs 5.74%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, RFEM or ECOW?

ECOW is cheaper with a 0.70% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for RFEM.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, RFEM or ECOW?

ECOW has the higher dividend yield at 4.61%, compared with 1.73% for RFEM.

What is the main difference between RFEM and ECOW?

They also come from different issuers: First Trust and Pacer. Their fees differ too: 0.95% for RFEM and 0.70% for ECOW.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

ECOW currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.08 vs 2.05), 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.