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 GARP: how they differ

COWZ and GARP hold 8% of their weight in the same names, and GARP returned more over the year.

Pacer US Cash Cows 100 ETF and iShares MSCI USA Quality GARP ETF.

What they hold in common

By the books each fund has filed, COWZ and GARP hold 8% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.

Positions COWZ and GARP both hold, largest shared weight first
HoldingCOWZGARP
Adobe Inc1.75%2.71%
Airbnb Inc1.62%1.10%
Uber Technologies Inc2.01%0.70%
Autodesk Inc0.72%0.58%
Jabil Inc0.55%0.57%
Expedia Group Inc1.03%0.54%
Booking Holdings Inc1.87%0.36%
EQT Corp0.92%0.25%
McKesson Corp1.79%0.24%
ResMed Inc0.50%0.22%
Lululemon Athletica Inc0.30%0.21%
Valero Energy Corp1.48%0.20%
Largest positions each one holds and the other does not
Only in COWZOnly in GARP
QUALCOMM Inc 2.67%KLA CORP 6.46%
Altria Group Inc 2.21%MICRON TECHNOLOGY INC 6.07%
ConocoPhillips 2.17%APPLE INC 4.44%
CVS Health Corp 2.16%NVIDIA CORP 4.16%
Bristol-Myers Squibb Co 2.03%MICROSOFT CORP 4.10%
Pfizer Inc 2.00%BROADCOM INC 3.96%
Diamondback Energy Inc 1.99%LAM RESEARCH CORP 3.79%
Verizon Communications Inc 1.90%ELI LILLY & COMPANY 3.73%

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.

COWZ and GARP on the fields both publish, as of Sep 12, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.
COWZ
Pacer US Cash Cows 100 ETF
GARP
iShares MSCI USA Quality GARP ETF
Where it sitsCore index fundCore index fund
IssuerPaceriShares
What it isUS Cash Cows 100MSCI USA Quality GARP
Total return, 1 year+23.4%+29.5%
S&P 500 over the same days+17.5%+17.5%
Gap to the S&P 500+5.9 pts+12.0 pts
Expense ratio0.49%0.15%
Already in the S&P 50095.8%94.4%
Holdings100131

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.

GARP in plain words

GARP is an index equity fund tracking the MSCI USA Quality GARP. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +29.5% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.15% a year. By its holdings filed for Jun 30, 2026, 94% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 131 positions, with the top ten at 43.8%.

Questions people ask

Which returned more over the last year, COWZ or GARP?
In the year to Sep 12, 2026, with distributions reinvested, COWZ returned +23.4% and GARP returned +29.5%, so GARP returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.
Which is cheaper, COWZ or GARP?
COWZ charges 0.49% a year and GARP charges 0.15%, so GARP is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
How much do COWZ and GARP overlap with the S&P 500?
By their latest filed holdings, 96% of COWZ and 94% of GARP by weight is stocks the S&P 500 already holds. Between the two funds, 8% 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 GARP, 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 GARP, data as of Sep 12, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/any/COWZ-GARP Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.

A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources