RSST vs. GCOW

Last updated Jun 13, 2026

RSST (Return Stacked U.S. Stocks & Managed Futures ETF) and GCOW (Pacer Global Cash Cows Dividend ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - RSST is a Large Cap Blend Equities fund actively managed by Return Stacked, while GCOW is a Large Cap Value Equities fund tracking the Pacer Global Cash Cows Dividends Index. RSST is actively managed, while GCOW is passively managed. Over the past year, RSST returned 48.11% vs 24.86% for GCOW. At a 0.43 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. RSST charges 1.04%/yr vs 0.60%/yr for GCOW.

Performance

RSST vs. GCOW - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Return Stacked U.S. Stocks & Managed Futures ETF (RSST) and Pacer Global Cash Cows Dividend ETF (GCOW). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, RSST achieves a 14.53% return, which is significantly higher than GCOW's 12.75% return.

RSST

• 1D: 1.06%
• 1M: -4.58%
• YTD: 14.53%
• 6M: 17.56%
• 1Y: 48.11%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

GCOW

• 1D: 0.22%
• 1M: -0.75%
• YTD: 12.75%
• 6M: 13.53%
• 1Y: 24.86%
• 3Y*: 16.79%
• 5Y*: 12.37%
• 10Y*: 10.32%

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

RSST vs. GCOW - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
RSST Return Stacked U.S. Stocks & Managed Futures ETF	14.53%	19.91%	18.37%	1.58%
GCOW Pacer Global Cash Cows Dividend ETF	12.75%	27.34%	3.52%	5.02%

Correlation

The correlation between RSST and GCOW is 0.46, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.46
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 6, 2023	0.43

RSST vs. GCOW - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	RSST	GCOW
Technology	30.7%	0.9%
Financial Services	14.6%	-
Communication Services	9.6%	14.6%
Consumer Cyclical	9.2%	4.6%
Industrials	8.8%	12.4%
Healthcare	8.2%	14.6%
Consumer Defensive	6.0%	17.1%
Energy	5.4%	24.4%
Basic Materials	3.4%	7.3%
Utilities	2.7%	4.1%
Real Estate	1.6%	-

Return for Risk

RSST vs. GCOW — Risk / Return Rank

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

RSST

RSST Risk / Return Rank: 70
RSST Sharpe Ratio Rank: 69
RSST Sortino Ratio Rank: 56
RSST Omega Ratio Rank: 64
RSST Calmar Ratio Rank: 83
RSST Martin Ratio Rank: 78

GCOW

GCOW Risk / Return Rank: 82
GCOW Sharpe Ratio Rank: 81
GCOW Sortino Ratio Rank: 84
GCOW Omega Ratio Rank: 77
GCOW Calmar Ratio Rank: 91
GCOW Martin Ratio Rank: 78

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.

RSST vs. GCOW - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Return Stacked U.S. Stocks & Managed Futures ETF (RSST) 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.

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.

	RSST	GCOW	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.94	2.26	-0.31
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.35	3.27	-0.92
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.33	1.39	-0.06
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.89	5.13	-1.24
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	12.98	13.09	-0.11

RSST vs. GCOW - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RSST Sharpe Ratio is 1.94, which is comparable to the GCOW Sharpe Ratio of 2.26. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RSST and GCOW, 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

RSST vs. GCOW - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RSST drawdown since its inception was -30.80%, smaller than the maximum GCOW drawdown of -37.64%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RSST and GCOW.

Drawdown Indicators

	RSST	GCOW	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-30.80%	-37.64%	+6.84%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-11.71%	-4.77%	-6.94%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-12.35%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-21.48%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-37.64%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-6.59%	-2.24%	-4.35%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-6.03%	-5.83%	-0.20%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.51%	1.88%	+1.63%

Volatility

RSST vs. GCOW - Volatility Comparison

Return Stacked U.S. Stocks & Managed Futures ETF (RSST) has a higher volatility of 8.70% compared to Pacer Global Cash Cows Dividend ETF (GCOW) at 2.45%. This indicates that RSST's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than GCOW based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	RSST	GCOW	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	8.70%	2.45%	+6.25%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	17.17%	7.96%	+9.21%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	23.43%	10.85%	+12.58%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	24.47%	13.49%	+10.98%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	24.47%	16.17%	+8.30%

RSST vs. GCOW - Expense Ratio Comparison

RSST has a 1.04% expense ratio, which is higher than GCOW's 0.60% expense ratio.

Dividends

RSST vs. GCOW - Dividend Comparison

RSST's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.98%, less than GCOW's 4.67% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016
GCOW Pacer Global Cash Cows Dividend ETF	4.67%	4.06%	5.14%	5.28%	4.39%	4.23%	4.12%	4.40%	3.94%	2.79%	1.95%
RSST Return Stacked U.S. Stocks & Managed Futures ETF	0.98%	1.12%	0.09%	0.93%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both RSST and GCOW in my portfolio?

RSST and GCOW have a correlation of 0.46, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, RSST or GCOW?

RSST has higher volatility (8.70%) compared to GCOW (2.45%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RSST dropped -30.80% vs GCOW's -37.64%.

Which ETF is better, RSST or GCOW?

On 1-year performance, RSST leads with 48.11% vs 24.86% for GCOW. On fees, GCOW is cheaper at 0.60% per year. On volatility, GCOW has been the lower-risk option at 2.45%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, RSST or GCOW?

Over the 1-year period, RSST has performed better with a 48.11% return vs 24.86%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, RSST or GCOW?

GCOW is cheaper with a 0.60% expense ratio, compared with 1.04% for RSST.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, RSST or GCOW?

GCOW has the higher dividend yield at 4.67%, compared with 0.98% for RSST.

What is the main difference between RSST and GCOW?

RSST is categorized as Large Cap Blend Equities, while GCOW is Large Cap Value Equities. They also come from different issuers: Return Stacked and Pacer. Their fees differ too: 1.04% for RSST and 0.60% for GCOW.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

GCOW currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.26 vs 1.94), 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.