PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
XLG vs. COWG
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

XLG vs. COWG - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Invesco S&P 500 Top 50 ETF (XLG) and Pacer US Large Cap Cash Cows Growth Leaders ETF (COWG). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, XLG achieves a 8.03% return, which is significantly lower than COWG's 12.42% return.


XLG

1D
0.42%
1M
4.19%
YTD
8.03%
6M
7.64%
1Y
28.88%
3Y*
24.70%
5Y*
16.34%
10Y*
17.28%

COWG

1D
-0.07%
1M
7.01%
YTD
12.42%
6M
12.40%
1Y
13.09%
3Y*
24.56%
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

XLG vs. COWG - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)2025202420232022
XLG
Invesco S&P 500 Top 50 ETF
8.03%19.51%33.49%38.16%0.27%
COWG
Pacer US Large Cap Cash Cows Growth Leaders ETF
12.42%10.24%34.99%20.69%-0.68%

Correlation

The correlation between XLG and COWG 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 (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.80

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 23, 2022

0.81

The correlation between XLG and COWG has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.73 to 0.81 - a consistent structural relationship.

XLG vs. COWG - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
XLG
COWG

Technology

43.9%
48.5%

Communication Services

17.1%
5.2%

Consumer Cyclical

11.3%
3.2%

Financial Services

9.6%

-

Healthcare

7.0%
21.0%

Consumer Defensive

5.8%
2.0%

Energy

2.7%
8.4%

Industrials

1.9%
3.6%

Basic Materials

0.6%
6.5%

Real Estate

-

-

Utilities

-

1.5%

Technology

XLG
43.9%
COWG
48.5%

Communication Services

XLG
17.1%
COWG
5.2%

Consumer Cyclical

XLG
11.3%
COWG
3.2%

Financial Services

XLG
9.6%
COWG

-

Healthcare

XLG
7.0%
COWG
21.0%

Consumer Defensive

XLG
5.8%
COWG
2.0%

Energy

XLG
2.7%
COWG
8.4%

Industrials

XLG
1.9%
COWG
3.6%

Basic Materials

XLG
0.6%
COWG
6.5%

Real Estate

XLG

-

COWG

-

Utilities

XLG

-

COWG
1.5%

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

XLG vs. COWG — Risk / Return Rank

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

XLG
XLG Risk / Return Rank: 6060
Overall Rank
XLG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6767
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XLG Sortino Ratio Rank: 6565
Sortino Ratio Rank
XLG Omega Ratio Rank: 6565
Omega Ratio Rank
XLG Calmar Ratio Rank: 4848
Calmar Ratio Rank
XLG Martin Ratio Rank: 5252
Martin Ratio Rank

COWG
COWG Risk / Return Rank: 2525
Overall Rank
COWG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2424
Sharpe Ratio Rank
COWG Sortino Ratio Rank: 2424
Sortino Ratio Rank
COWG Omega Ratio Rank: 2323
Omega Ratio Rank
COWG Calmar Ratio Rank: 2626
Calmar Ratio Rank
COWG Martin Ratio Rank: 2727
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

XLG vs. COWG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco S&P 500 Top 50 ETF (XLG) and Pacer US Large Cap Cash Cows Growth Leaders ETF (COWG). 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.


XLGCOWGDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+1.35

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+1.73

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.38

1.15

+0.24

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.34

1.22

+1.12

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

8.77

3.57

+5.20

XLG vs. COWG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XLG Sharpe Ratio is 2.18, which is higher than the COWG Sharpe Ratio of 0.82. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XLG and COWG, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


XLGCOWGDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.18

0.82

+1.35

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.88

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.92

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.63

1.18

-0.56

Drawdowns

XLG vs. COWG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XLG drawdown since its inception was -52.39%, which is greater than COWG's maximum drawdown of -23.60%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XLG and COWG.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


XLGCOWGDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-52.39%

-23.60%

-28.79%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-12.41%

-10.79%

-1.62%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-20.70%

-23.60%

+2.90%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-28.02%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-30.46%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.02%

-0.07%

-0.95%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-7.64%

-3.28%

-4.36%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.30%

3.67%

-0.37%

Volatility

XLG vs. COWG - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Invesco S&P 500 Top 50 ETF (XLG) is 3.19%, while Pacer US Large Cap Cash Cows Growth Leaders ETF (COWG) has a volatility of 3.63%. This indicates that XLG experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than COWG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


XLGCOWGDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.19%

3.63%

-0.44%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

9.81%

12.01%

-2.20%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

13.32%

15.94%

-2.62%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

18.68%

19.09%

-0.41%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

18.84%

19.09%

-0.25%

XLG vs. COWG - Expense Ratio Comparison

XLG has a 0.20% expense ratio, which is lower than COWG's 0.49% expense ratio.


Dividends

XLG vs. COWG - Dividend Comparison

XLG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.60%, more than COWG's 0.38% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
COWG
Pacer US Large Cap Cash Cows Growth Leaders ETF
0.36%0.32%0.40%0.47%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
XLG
Invesco S&P 500 Top 50 ETF
0.60%0.64%0.72%0.97%1.34%0.94%1.25%1.58%2.00%1.85%2.00%2.09%

Frequently Asked Questions


XLG and COWG 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.

COWG has higher volatility (3.63%) compared to XLG (3.19%). In terms of maximum drawdown, XLG dropped -52.39% vs COWG's -23.60%.

On 3-year performance, XLG leads with 24.70% vs 24.56% for COWG. On fees, XLG is cheaper at 0.20% per year. On volatility, XLG has been the lower-risk option at 3.19%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 3-year period, XLG has performed better with a 24.70% return vs 24.56%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

XLG is cheaper with a 0.20% expense ratio, compared with 0.49% for COWG.

XLG has the higher dividend yield at 0.60%, compared with 0.38% for COWG.

XLG is categorized as S&P 500, while COWG is Mid Cap Growth Equities. XLG tracks S&P 500 Top 50 Index, while COWG tracks Pacer US Large Cap Cash Cows Growth Leaders Index. They also come from different issuers: Invesco and Pacer. Their fees differ too: 0.20% for XLG and 0.49% for COWG.

XLG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.18 vs 0.82), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for XLG and COWG

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