Data as of Sep 12, 2026. Both funds on the fields they both publish, from the same sources.
CGBL vs COWZ: how they differ
CGBL and COWZ hold 4% of their weight in the same names, and COWZ returned more over the year.
Capital Group Core Balanced ETF and Pacer US Cash Cows 100 ETF.
What they hold in common
By the books each fund has filed, CGBL and COWZ hold 4% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.
| Holding | CGBL | COWZ |
|---|---|---|
| Booking Holdings Inc | 1.10% | 1.87% |
| Gilead Sciences Inc | 0.74% | 1.84% |
| Comcast Corp | 0.65% | 1.71% |
| CVS Health Corp | 0.48% | 2.16% |
| DR Horton Inc | 0.48% | 1.21% |
| ConocoPhillips | 0.46% | 2.17% |
| Illumina Inc | 0.43% | 0.31% |
| Only in CGBL | Only in COWZ |
|---|---|
| Capital Group Core Plus Income ETF 23.22% | QUALCOMM Inc 2.67% |
| Capital Group Core Bond ETF 15.60% | Altria Group Inc 2.21% |
| Broadcom Inc 4.57% | Bristol-Myers Squibb Co 2.03% |
| Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co Lt 3.48% | Ford Motor Co 2.01% |
| Alphabet Inc 2.78% | Uber Technologies Inc 2.01% |
| Micron Technology Inc 2.23% | Pfizer Inc 2.00% |
| Philip Morris International Inc 2.07% | Diamondback Energy Inc 1.99% |
| Apple Inc 2.00% | Newmont Corp 1.93% |
Weight overlap is an ETFIQ calculation: for every security both funds hold, the smaller of the two weights, summed. Above 50%, holding both is close to holding one of them twice. Holdings dated Apr 30, 2026 and Jun 30, 2026.
| CGBL Capital Group Core Balanced ETF | COWZ Pacer US Cash Cows 100 ETF | |
|---|---|---|
| Where it sits | Core index fund | Core index fund |
| Issuer | Capital | Pacer |
| What it is | Core Balanced | US Cash Cows 100 |
| Total return, 1 year | +9.9% | +23.4% |
| S&P 500 over the same days | +17.5% | +17.5% |
| Gap to the S&P 500 | −7.6 pts | +5.9 pts |
| Expense ratio | 0.33% | 0.49% |
| Already in the S&P 500 | 48.1% | 95.8% |
| Holdings | 77 | 100 |
CGBL in plain words
CGBL is an index equity fund tracking the Core Balanced. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +9.9% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.33% a year. By its holdings filed for Jun 30, 2026, 48% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 77 positions, with the top ten at 59.2%.
COWZ in plain words
COWZ is an index equity fund tracking the US Cash Cows 100. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +23.4% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.49% a year. By its holdings filed for Apr 30, 2026, 96% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 100 positions, with the top ten at 21.2%. It sat 3.2% below its high of Sep 3, 2026 on Sep 11, 2026.
Questions people ask
- Which returned more over the last year, CGBL or COWZ?
- In the year to Sep 12, 2026, with distributions reinvested, CGBL returned +9.9% and COWZ returned +23.4%, so COWZ returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.
- Which is cheaper, CGBL or COWZ?
- CGBL charges 0.33% a year and COWZ charges 0.49%, so CGBL is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
- How much do CGBL and COWZ overlap with the S&P 500?
- By their latest filed holdings, 48% of CGBL and 96% of COWZ by weight is stocks the S&P 500 already holds. Between the two funds, 4% of their books are the same securities at the same weight.
Other comparisons
Where to next
Where these figures came from
ETFIQ links to the documents behind every figure. It is not affiliated with any issuer, and a link is not an endorsement.
Cite this page. ETFIQ, CGBL against COWZ, data as of Sep 12, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/any/CGBL-COWZ Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.
A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources