TBFG vs. QQWZ

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

TBFG (The Brinsmere Fund - Growth ETF) and QQWZ (Pacer Cash COWZ 100-Nasdaq 100 Rotator ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - TBFG is a Tactical Allocation fund actively managed by The Brinsmere Funds, while QQWZ is a Nasdaq-100 fund actively managed by Pacer. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, TBFG returned 24.15% vs 36.51% for QQWZ. A 0.73 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. TBFG charges 0.42%/yr vs 0.49%/yr for QQWZ.

Performance

TBFG vs. QQWZ - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in The Brinsmere Fund - Growth ETF (TBFG) and Pacer Cash COWZ 100-Nasdaq 100 Rotator ETF (QQWZ). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, TBFG achieves a 10.44% return, which is significantly lower than QQWZ's 18.35% return.

TBFG

• 1D: 0.08%
• 1M: 3.51%
• YTD: 10.44%
• 6M: 11.28%
• 1Y: 24.15%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

QQWZ

• 1D: -0.48%
• 1M: 8.73%
• YTD: 18.35%
• 6M: 15.96%
• 1Y: 36.51%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

TBFG vs. QQWZ - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
TBFG The Brinsmere Fund - Growth ETF	10.44%	16.26%
QQWZ Pacer Cash COWZ 100-Nasdaq 100 Rotator ETF	18.35%	26.23%

Correlation

The correlation between TBFG and QQWZ is 0.73, 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	0.73
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 8, 2025	0.73

The correlation between TBFG and QQWZ has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.73 to 0.73 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

TBFG vs. QQWZ — Risk / Return Rank

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

TBFG

TBFG Risk / Return Rank: 75
TBFG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 78
TBFG Sortino Ratio Rank: 79
TBFG Omega Ratio Rank: 79
TBFG Calmar Ratio Rank: 65
TBFG Martin Ratio Rank: 74

QQWZ

QQWZ Risk / Return Rank: 83
QQWZ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 83
QQWZ Sortino Ratio Rank: 80
QQWZ Omega Ratio Rank: 80
QQWZ Calmar Ratio Rank: 86
QQWZ Martin Ratio Rank: 85

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.

TBFG vs. QQWZ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for The Brinsmere Fund - Growth ETF (TBFG) 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.

	TBFG	QQWZ	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.49	2.67	-0.17
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.49	3.55	-0.06
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.46	1.47	-0.01
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.18	4.70	-1.52
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	13.74	17.30	-3.56
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

TBFG vs. QQWZ - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current TBFG Sharpe Ratio is 2.49, which is comparable to the QQWZ Sharpe Ratio of 2.67. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of TBFG and QQWZ, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	TBFG	QQWZ	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.49	2.67	-0.17
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.39	3.20	-1.82

Drawdowns

TBFG vs. QQWZ - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum TBFG drawdown since its inception was -13.43%, which is greater than QQWZ's maximum drawdown of -7.81%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for TBFG and QQWZ.

Drawdown Indicators

	TBFG	QQWZ	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-13.43%	-7.81%	-5.62%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-7.63%	-7.81%	+0.18%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.28%	-0.72%	+0.44%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.62%	-1.36%	-0.26%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.76%	2.12%	-0.36%

Volatility

TBFG vs. QQWZ - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for The Brinsmere Fund - Growth ETF (TBFG) is 2.91%, while Pacer Cash COWZ 100-Nasdaq 100 Rotator ETF (QQWZ) has a volatility of 4.36%. This indicates that TBFG 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.

Volatility by Period

	TBFG	QQWZ	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.91%	4.36%	-1.45%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	8.00%	8.84%	-0.84%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	9.73%	13.76%	-4.03%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	10.94%	14.21%	-3.27%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	10.94%	14.21%	-3.27%

TBFG vs. QQWZ - Expense Ratio Comparison

TBFG has a 0.42% expense ratio, which is lower than QQWZ's 0.49% expense ratio.

Dividends

TBFG vs. QQWZ - Dividend Comparison

TBFG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.35%, more than QQWZ's 0.56% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024
QQWZ Pacer Cash COWZ 100-Nasdaq 100 Rotator ETF	0.56%	0.11%	0.00%
TBFG The Brinsmere Fund - Growth ETF	2.35%	2.65%	2.43%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both TBFG and QQWZ in my portfolio?

TBFG and QQWZ have a correlation of 0.73, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, TBFG or QQWZ?

QQWZ has higher volatility (4.36%) compared to TBFG (2.91%). In terms of maximum drawdown, TBFG dropped -13.43% vs QQWZ's -7.81%.

Which ETF is better, TBFG or QQWZ?

On 1-year performance, QQWZ leads with 36.51% vs 24.15% for TBFG. On fees, TBFG is cheaper at 0.42% per year. On volatility, TBFG has been the lower-risk option at 2.91%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, TBFG or QQWZ?

Over the 1-year period, QQWZ has performed better with a 36.51% return vs 24.15%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, TBFG or QQWZ?

TBFG is cheaper with a 0.42% expense ratio, compared with 0.49% for QQWZ.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, TBFG or QQWZ?

TBFG has the higher dividend yield at 2.35%, compared with 0.56% for QQWZ.

What is the main difference between TBFG and QQWZ?

TBFG is categorized as Tactical Allocation, while QQWZ is Nasdaq-100. They also come from different issuers: The Brinsmere Funds and Pacer. Their fees differ too: 0.42% for TBFG and 0.49% for QQWZ.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

QQWZ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.67 vs 2.49), 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.