Get the weekly note

Data as of Sep 12, 2026. Both funds on the fields they both publish, from the same sources.

ETFIQetfiq.com · independent ETF data

COWZ vs FNDX: how they differ

COWZ and FNDX hold 16% of their weight in the same names, and FNDX returned more over the year.

Pacer US Cash Cows 100 ETF and Schwab Fundamental U.S. Large Company ETF.

What they hold in common

By the books each fund has filed, COWZ and FNDX hold 16% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.

Positions COWZ and FNDX both hold, largest shared weight first
HoldingCOWZFNDX
Verizon Communications Inc1.90%0.99%
CVS Health Corp2.16%0.91%
AT&T Inc1.84%0.81%
Valero Energy Corp1.48%0.71%
Pfizer Inc2.00%0.69%
ConocoPhillips2.17%0.66%
Marathon Petroleum Corp1.78%0.63%
Ford Motor Co2.01%0.60%
Comcast Corp1.71%0.57%
Bristol-Myers Squibb Co2.03%0.53%
QUALCOMM Inc2.67%0.53%
Target Corp1.07%0.40%
Largest positions each one holds and the other does not
Only in COWZOnly in FNDX
Accenture PLC 1.68%Apple Inc 4.64%
United Airlines Holdings Inc 0.83%Intel Corp 2.57%
Coterra Energy Inc 0.63%Alphabet Inc 2.38%
Flex Ltd 0.59%Microsoft Corp 2.33%
TechnipFMC PLC 0.58%Exxon Mobil Corp 2.29%
VeriSign Inc 0.39%Alphabet Inc 1.90%
Twilio Inc 0.36%Amazon.com Inc 1.86%
Veeva Systems Inc 0.36%Micron Technology Inc 1.60%

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 May 31, 2026.

COWZ and FNDX on the fields both publish, as of Sep 12, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.
COWZ
Pacer US Cash Cows 100 ETF
FNDX
Schwab Fundamental U.S. Large Company ETF
Where it sitsCore index fundCore index fund
IssuerPacerSchwab
What it isUS Cash Cows 100Fundamental U.S. Large Company
Total return, 1 year+23.4%+26.1%
S&P 500 over the same days+17.5%+17.5%
Gap to the S&P 500+5.9 pts+8.6 pts
Expense ratio0.49%0.25%
Already in the S&P 50095.8%91.2%
Holdings100733

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.

FNDX in plain words

FNDX is an index equity fund tracking the Fundamental U.S. Large Company. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +26.1% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.25% a year. By its holdings filed for May 31, 2026, 91% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 733 positions, with the top ten at 22.5%.

Questions people ask

Which returned more over the last year, COWZ or FNDX?
In the year to Sep 12, 2026, with distributions reinvested, COWZ returned +23.4% and FNDX returned +26.1%, so FNDX returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.
Which is cheaper, COWZ or FNDX?
COWZ charges 0.49% a year and FNDX charges 0.25%, so FNDX is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
How much do COWZ and FNDX overlap with the S&P 500?
By their latest filed holdings, 96% of COWZ and 91% of FNDX by weight is stocks the S&P 500 already holds. Between the two funds, 16% 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.

COWZ against FNDX, ETFIQ, data as of Sep 12, 2026. Every figure is arithmetic on a named public source; the method is at etfiq.com/methodology. A comparison is not a recommendation.

Cite this page. ETFIQ, COWZ against FNDX, data as of Sep 12, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/any/COWZ-FNDX Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.

A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources