XMHQ vs. COWZ

Last updated Jul 22, 2026

XMHQ (Invesco S&P MidCap Quality ETF) and COWZ (Pacer US Cash Cows 100 ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - XMHQ is a Mid Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the S&P MidCap 400 Quality Index, while COWZ is a Mid Cap Value Equities fund tracking the Pacer US Cash Cows 100 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, XMHQ returned 10.27%/yr vs 10.59%/yr for COWZ. Their correlation of 0.80 suggests significant overlap in exposure. XMHQ charges 0.25%/yr vs 0.49%/yr for COWZ.

Performance

XMHQ vs. COWZ - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Invesco S&P MidCap Quality ETF (XMHQ) and Pacer US Cash Cows 100 ETF (COWZ). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, XMHQ achieves a 10.45% return, which is significantly higher than COWZ's 7.80% return.

XMHQ

• 1D: 0.76%
• 1M: 2.00%
• 6M: 5.68%
• YTD: 10.45%
• 1Y: 14.80%
• 3Y*: 13.23%
• 5Y*: 10.27%
• 10Y*: 12.52%
• ALL TIME*: 9.39%

COWZ

• 1D: -0.20%
• 1M: 4.45%
• 6M: 6.28%
• YTD: 7.80%
• 1Y: 17.95%
• 3Y*: 10.97%
• 5Y*: 10.59%
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 12.59%

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

XMHQ vs. COWZ - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
XMHQ Invesco S&P MidCap Quality ETF	10.45%	4.71%	16.79%	29.51%	-12.42%	20.98%	26.61%	27.18%	-9.08%	15.64%
COWZ Pacer US Cash Cows 100 ETF	7.80%	8.98%	10.64%	14.73%	0.19%	42.57%	11.65%	23.41%	-10.05%	20.22%

Correlation

The correlation between XMHQ and COWZ is 0.65, 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	0.65
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.77
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.83
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 19, 2016	0.80

The correlation between XMHQ and COWZ shifts across timeframes, from 0.65 (1 year) to 0.83 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

XMHQ vs. COWZ - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	XMHQ	COWZ
Industrials	30.2%	8.4%
Technology	18.5%	22.9%
Healthcare	16.0%	19.9%
Financial Services	15.1%	-
Consumer Cyclical	9.4%	14.3%
Energy	6.9%	11.2%
Utilities	2.2%	-
Basic Materials	1.5%	4.0%
Communication Services	1.4%	8.8%
Consumer Defensive	1.1%	10.6%
Real Estate	-	-

Return for Risk

XMHQ vs. COWZ — Risk / Return Rank

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

XMHQ

XMHQ Risk / Return Rank: 38
XMHQ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 35
XMHQ Sortino Ratio Rank: 37
XMHQ Omega Ratio Rank: 32
XMHQ Calmar Ratio Rank: 44
XMHQ Martin Ratio Rank: 42

COWZ

COWZ Risk / Return Rank: 68
COWZ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 64
COWZ Sortino Ratio Rank: 68
COWZ Omega Ratio Rank: 61
COWZ Calmar Ratio Rank: 79
COWZ Martin Ratio Rank: 65

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.

XMHQ vs. COWZ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco S&P MidCap Quality ETF (XMHQ) and Pacer US Cash Cows 100 ETF (COWZ). 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.

	XMHQ	COWZ	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.95	1.57	-0.62
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.49	2.33	-0.84
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.17	1.28	-0.11
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.68	3.03	-1.35
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	4.89	8.49	-3.60

XMHQ vs. COWZ - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XMHQ Sharpe Ratio is 0.95, which is lower than the COWZ Sharpe Ratio of 1.57. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XMHQ and COWZ, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

XMHQ vs. COWZ - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XMHQ drawdown since its inception was -58.19%, which is greater than COWZ's maximum drawdown of -38.63%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XMHQ and COWZ.

Drawdown Indicators

	XMHQ	COWZ	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-58.19%	-38.63%	-19.56%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-8.85%	-5.95%	-2.90%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-24.56%	-22.00%	-2.56%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-25.47%	-22.00%	-3.47%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-36.90%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.64%	-1.26%	-0.38%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-9.23%	-4.78%	-4.45%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.03%	2.12%	+0.91%

Volatility

XMHQ vs. COWZ - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Invesco S&P MidCap Quality ETF (XMHQ) is 3.22%, while Pacer US Cash Cows 100 ETF (COWZ) has a volatility of 3.82%. This indicates that XMHQ experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than COWZ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	XMHQ	COWZ	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.22%	3.82%	-0.60%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	11.23%	8.03%	+3.20%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	15.61%	11.49%	+4.12%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	20.60%	17.63%	+2.97%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	20.63%	19.86%	+0.77%

XMHQ vs. COWZ - Expense Ratio Comparison

XMHQ has a 0.25% expense ratio, which is lower than COWZ's 0.49% expense ratio.

Dividends

XMHQ vs. COWZ - Dividend Comparison

XMHQ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.57%, less than COWZ's 1.92% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
COWZ Pacer US Cash Cows 100 ETF	1.92%	2.19%	1.82%	1.92%	1.96%	1.48%	2.54%	1.96%	1.67%	1.95%	0.13%	0.00%
XMHQ Invesco S&P MidCap Quality ETF	0.57%	0.64%	5.20%	0.73%	1.72%	1.00%	1.12%	1.22%	1.59%	1.06%	1.63%	1.34%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both XMHQ and COWZ in my portfolio?

XMHQ and COWZ have a correlation of 0.65, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, XMHQ or COWZ?

COWZ has higher volatility (3.82%) compared to XMHQ (3.22%). In terms of maximum drawdown, XMHQ dropped -58.19% vs COWZ's -38.63%.

Which ETF is better, XMHQ or COWZ?

On 5-year performance, COWZ leads with 10.59% vs 10.27% for XMHQ. On fees, XMHQ is cheaper at 0.25% per year. On volatility, XMHQ has been the lower-risk option at 3.22%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, XMHQ or COWZ?

Over the 5-year period, COWZ has performed better with a 10.59% return vs 10.27%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, XMHQ or COWZ?

XMHQ is cheaper with a 0.25% expense ratio, compared with 0.49% for COWZ.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, XMHQ or COWZ?

COWZ has the higher dividend yield at 1.92%, compared with 0.57% for XMHQ.

What is the main difference between XMHQ and COWZ?

XMHQ is categorized as Mid Cap Blend Equities, while COWZ is Mid Cap Value Equities. XMHQ tracks S&P MidCap 400 Quality Index, while COWZ tracks Pacer US Cash Cows 100 Index. They also come from different issuers: Invesco and Pacer. Their fees differ too: 0.25% for XMHQ and 0.49% for COWZ.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

COWZ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.57 vs 0.95), 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.