RWL vs. QQWZ
RWL (Invesco S&P 500 Revenue ETF) and QQWZ (Pacer Cash COWZ 100-Nasdaq 100 Rotator ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - RWL is a S&P 500 fund tracking the S&P 500 Revenue-Weighted Index, while QQWZ is a Nasdaq-100 fund actively managed by Pacer. RWL is passively managed, while QQWZ is actively managed. Over the past year, RWL returned 26.76% vs 37.59% for QQWZ. A 0.61 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. RWL charges 0.39%/yr vs 0.49%/yr for QQWZ.
Performance
RWL vs. QQWZ - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, RWL achieves a 11.07% return, which is significantly lower than QQWZ's 18.92% return.
RWL
- 1D
- -0.42%
- 1M
- 3.13%
- YTD
- 11.07%
- 6M
- 11.66%
- 1Y
- 26.76%
- 3Y*
- 19.96%
- 5Y*
- 12.89%
- 10Y*
- 13.96%
QQWZ
- 1D
- -0.24%
- 1M
- 10.66%
- YTD
- 18.92%
- 6M
- 16.34%
- 1Y
- 37.59%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
RWL vs. QQWZ - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
RWL Invesco S&P 500 Revenue ETF | 11.07% | 17.98% |
QQWZ Pacer Cash COWZ 100-Nasdaq 100 Rotator ETF | 18.92% | 26.23% |
Correlation
The correlation between RWL and QQWZ is 0.60, 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 | 0.60 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 8, 2025 | 0.61 |
The correlation between RWL and QQWZ has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.60 to 0.61 - a consistent structural relationship.
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
RWL vs. QQWZ — Risk / Return Rank
RWL
QQWZ
RWL vs. QQWZ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco S&P 500 Revenue ETF (RWL) and Pacer Cash COWZ 100-Nasdaq 100 Rotator ETF (QQWZ). 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.
| RWL | QQWZ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.06 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.13 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.48 | 1.49 | -0.01 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 4.05 | 4.84 | -0.79 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 17.12 | 17.81 | -0.70 |
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
| RWL | QQWZ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.69 | 2.75 | -0.06 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.89 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.83 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.58 | 3.26 | -2.69 |
Drawdowns
RWL vs. QQWZ - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum RWL drawdown since its inception was -54.83%, which is greater than QQWZ's maximum drawdown of -7.81%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RWL and QQWZ.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| RWL | QQWZ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -54.83% | -7.81% | -47.02% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -6.64% | -7.81% | +1.17% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -14.39% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -17.49% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -36.04% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.57% | -0.24% | -0.33% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -6.45% | -1.36% | -5.09% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.57% | 2.12% | -0.55% |
Volatility
RWL vs. QQWZ - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Invesco S&P 500 Revenue ETF (RWL) is 2.12%, while Pacer Cash COWZ 100-Nasdaq 100 Rotator ETF (QQWZ) has a volatility of 4.35%. This indicates that RWL experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than QQWZ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| RWL | QQWZ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 2.12% | 4.35% | -2.23% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 7.12% | 8.85% | -1.73% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 10.00% | 13.77% | -3.77% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 14.50% | 14.22% | +0.28% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 16.86% | 14.22% | +2.64% |
RWL vs. QQWZ - Expense Ratio Comparison
RWL has a 0.39% expense ratio, which is lower than QQWZ's 0.49% expense ratio.
Dividends
RWL vs. QQWZ - Dividend Comparison
RWL's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.25%, more than QQWZ's 0.31% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
QQWZ Pacer Cash COWZ 100-Nasdaq 100 Rotator ETF | 0.31% | 0.11% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
RWL Invesco S&P 500 Revenue ETF | 1.25% | 1.35% | 1.43% | 1.60% | 1.62% | 1.35% | 1.75% | 1.87% | 1.99% | 1.60% | 1.71% | 1.97% |
Frequently Asked Questions
RWL and QQWZ have a correlation of 0.60, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
QQWZ has higher volatility (4.35%) compared to RWL (2.12%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RWL dropped -54.83% vs QQWZ's -7.81%.
On 1-year performance, QQWZ leads with 37.59% vs 26.76% for RWL. On fees, RWL is cheaper at 0.39% per year. On volatility, RWL has been the lower-risk option at 2.12%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, QQWZ has performed better with a 37.59% return vs 26.76%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
RWL is cheaper with a 0.39% expense ratio, compared with 0.49% for QQWZ.
RWL has the higher dividend yield at 1.25%, compared with 0.31% for QQWZ.
RWL is categorized as S&P 500, while QQWZ is Nasdaq-100. They also come from different issuers: Invesco and Pacer. Their fees differ too: 0.39% for RWL and 0.49% for QQWZ.
QQWZ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.75 vs 2.69), 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 RWL and QQWZ
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