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 IWD: how they differ

COWZ and IWD hold 12% of their weight in the same names, and IWD returned more over the year.

Pacer US Cash Cows 100 ETF and iShares Russell 1000 Value ETF.

What they hold in common

By the books each fund has filed, COWZ and IWD hold 12% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.

Positions COWZ and IWD both hold, largest shared weight first
HoldingCOWZIWD
QUALCOMM Inc2.67%0.55%
Verizon Communications Inc1.90%0.50%
Gilead Sciences Inc1.84%0.44%
AT&T Inc1.84%0.39%
Pfizer Inc2.00%0.39%
CVS Health Corp2.16%0.37%
Uber Technologies Inc2.01%0.36%
ConocoPhillips2.17%0.36%
Salesforce Inc1.76%0.35%
Altria Group Inc2.21%0.34%
Bristol-Myers Squibb Co2.03%0.33%
Newmont Corp1.93%0.28%
Largest positions each one holds and the other does not
Only in COWZOnly in IWD
Booking Holdings Inc 1.87%AMAZON.COM, INC. 5.95%
Accenture PLC 1.68%APPLE INC. 5.38%
Airbnb Inc 1.62%MICROSOFT CORPORATION 3.89%
Cencora Inc 1.03%BERKSHIRE HATHAWAY INC. 2.62%
Expedia Group Inc 1.03%JPMORGAN CHASE & CO. 2.46%
Autodesk Inc 0.72%INTEL CORPORATION 1.72%
Coterra Energy Inc 0.63%JOHNSON & JOHNSON 1.72%
Flex Ltd 0.59%EXXON MOBIL CORPORATION 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 Jun 30, 2026.

COWZ and IWD on the fields both publish, as of Sep 12, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.
COWZ
Pacer US Cash Cows 100 ETF
IWD
iShares Russell 1000 Value ETF
Where it sitsCore index fundCore index fund
IssuerPaceriShares
What it isUS Cash Cows 100Russell 1000 value
Total return, 1 year+23.4%+27.4%
S&P 500 over the same days+17.5%+17.5%
Gap to the S&P 500+5.9 pts+9.9 pts
Expense ratio0.49%0.18%
Already in the S&P 50095.8%90.2%
Holdings100870

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.

IWD in plain words

IWD is an index equity fund tracking the Russell 1000 value. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +27.4% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.18% a year. By its holdings filed for Jun 30, 2026, 90% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 870 positions, with the top ten at 27.9%.

Questions people ask

Which returned more over the last year, COWZ or IWD?
In the year to Sep 12, 2026, with distributions reinvested, COWZ returned +23.4% and IWD returned +27.4%, so IWD returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.
Which is cheaper, COWZ or IWD?
COWZ charges 0.49% a year and IWD charges 0.18%, so IWD is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
How much do COWZ and IWD overlap with the S&P 500?
By their latest filed holdings, 96% of COWZ and 90% of IWD by weight is stocks the S&P 500 already holds. Between the two funds, 12% 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 IWD, 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 IWD, data as of Sep 12, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/any/COWZ-IWD Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.

A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources