SCOW vs. ROSC
SCOW (Pacer S&P SmallCap 600 Quality FCF Aristocrats ETF) and ROSC (Hartford Multifactor Small Cap ETF) are both Small Cap Blend Equities funds - SCOW tracks the S&P SmallCap 600 Quality FCF Aristocrats Index while ROSC tracks the ROSC-US - Hartford Multifactor Small Cap Index. Both are passively managed. Their correlation of 0.81 suggests significant overlap in exposure. SCOW charges 0.59%/yr vs 0.34%/yr for ROSC.
Performance
SCOW vs. ROSC - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, SCOW achieves a 7.34% return, which is significantly lower than ROSC's 16.64% return.
SCOW
- 1D
- 0.04%
- 1M
- 1.82%
- YTD
- 7.34%
- 6M
- 3.15%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
ROSC
- 1D
- 0.51%
- 1M
- 3.56%
- YTD
- 16.64%
- 6M
- 14.85%
- 1Y
- 34.90%
- 3Y*
- 17.42%
- 5Y*
- 8.95%
- 10Y*
- 11.36%
SCOW vs. ROSC - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
SCOW Pacer S&P SmallCap 600 Quality FCF Aristocrats ETF | 7.34% | -2.05% |
ROSC Hartford Multifactor Small Cap ETF | 16.64% | 4.59% |
Correlation
The correlation between SCOW and ROSC is 0.81, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 28, 2025 | 0.81 |
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
SCOW vs. ROSC — Risk / Return Rank
SCOW
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
ROSC
SCOW vs. ROSC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Pacer S&P SmallCap 600 Quality FCF Aristocrats ETF (SCOW) and Hartford Multifactor Small Cap ETF (ROSC). 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.
| SCOW | ROSC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | — | 1.40 | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | — | 4.52 | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | — | 14.75 | — |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
SCOW vs. ROSC - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum SCOW drawdown since its inception was -10.09%, smaller than the maximum ROSC drawdown of -43.13%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for SCOW and ROSC.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| SCOW | ROSC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -10.09% | -43.13% | +33.04% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | — | -7.75% | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -23.74% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -23.74% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -43.13% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -1.19% | -0.33% | -0.86% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -3.05% | -7.18% | +4.13% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | — | 2.37% | — |
Volatility
SCOW vs. ROSC - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| SCOW | ROSC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | — | 3.54% | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | — | 10.40% | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 16.96% | 15.53% | +1.43% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 16.96% | 19.29% | -2.33% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 16.96% | 20.24% | -3.28% |
SCOW vs. ROSC - Expense Ratio Comparison
SCOW has a 0.59% expense ratio, which is higher than ROSC's 0.34% expense ratio.
Dividends
SCOW vs. ROSC - Dividend Comparison
SCOW's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.39%, less than ROSC's 1.79% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ROSC Hartford Multifactor Small Cap ETF | 1.79% | 2.08% | 2.00% | 2.01% | 1.51% | 2.13% | 1.75% | 3.05% | 2.86% | 2.13% | 2.20% | 2.48% |
SCOW Pacer S&P SmallCap 600 Quality FCF Aristocrats ETF | 0.39% | 0.17% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
SCOW and ROSC have a correlation of 0.81, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, ROSC is cheaper at 0.34% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
ROSC is cheaper with a 0.34% expense ratio, compared with 0.59% for SCOW.
ROSC has the higher dividend yield at 1.79%, compared with 0.39% for SCOW.
SCOW tracks S&P SmallCap 600 Quality FCF Aristocrats Index, while ROSC tracks ROSC-US - Hartford Multifactor Small Cap Index. They also come from different issuers: Pacer and Hartford. Their fees differ too: 0.59% for SCOW and 0.34% for ROSC.
Find the right allocation for SCOW and ROSC
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