XLG vs. COWG
XLG (Invesco S&P 500 Top 50 ETF) and COWG (Pacer US Large Cap Cash Cows Growth Leaders ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - XLG is a S&P 500 fund tracking the S&P 500 Top 50 Index, while COWG is a Mid Cap Growth Equities fund tracking the Pacer US Large Cap Cash Cows Growth Leaders Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, XLG returned 24.70%/yr vs 24.56%/yr for COWG. Their correlation of 0.81 suggests significant overlap in exposure. XLG charges 0.20%/yr vs 0.49%/yr for COWG.
Performance
XLG vs. COWG - Performance Comparison
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*
- —
XLG vs. COWG - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
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
Communication Services
Consumer Cyclical
Financial Services
-
Healthcare
Consumer Defensive
Energy
Industrials
Basic Materials
Real Estate
-
-
Utilities
-
Technology
XLG
COWG
Communication Services
XLG
COWG
Consumer Cyclical
XLG
COWG
Financial Services
XLG
COWG
-
Healthcare
XLG
COWG
Consumer Defensive
XLG
COWG
Energy
XLG
COWG
Industrials
XLG
COWG
Basic Materials
XLG
COWG
Real Estate
XLG
-
COWG
-
Utilities
XLG
-
COWG
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
XLG
COWG
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.
| XLG | COWG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 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 |
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
| XLG | COWG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
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
| XLG | COWG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest 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 DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -1.02% | -0.07% | -0.95% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -7.64% | -3.28% | -4.36% |
Ulcer IndexDepth 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
| XLG | COWG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
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.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
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.
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