Data as of Sep 12, 2026. Both funds on the fields they both publish, from the same sources.
COWZ vs RDVY: how they differ
COWZ and RDVY hold 10% of their weight in the same names, and COWZ returned more over the year.
Pacer US Cash Cows 100 ETF and First Trust Rising Dividend Achievers ETF.
What they hold in common
By the books each fund has filed, COWZ and RDVY hold 10% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.
| Holding | COWZ | RDVY |
|---|---|---|
| Automatic Data Processing Inc | 1.31% | 1.63% |
| Salesforce Inc | 1.76% | 1.30% |
| Booking Holdings Inc | 1.87% | 1.18% |
| Expedia Group Inc | 1.03% | 1.51% |
| Accenture PLC | 1.68% | 1.00% |
| PACCAR Inc | 0.99% | 0.97% |
| Regeneron Pharmaceuticals Inc | 1.17% | 0.85% |
| Cognizant Technology Solutions | 0.69% | 0.82% |
| PulteGroup Inc | 0.58% | 1.33% |
| ResMed Inc | 0.50% | 1.11% |
| Williams-Sonoma Inc | 0.35% | 2.12% |
| Snap-on Inc | 0.34% | 2.00% |
| Only in COWZ | Only in RDVY |
|---|---|
| QUALCOMM Inc 2.67% | APPLIED MATERIALS INC 4.69% |
| Altria Group Inc 2.21% | LAM RESEARCH CORP 4.42% |
| ConocoPhillips 2.17% | KLA CORP 4.14% |
| CVS Health Corp 2.16% | GE VERNOVA INC 2.80% |
| Bristol-Myers Squibb Co 2.03% | BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON CORP (THE) 2.15% |
| Ford Motor Co 2.01% | GE AEROSPACE 2.13% |
| Uber Technologies Inc 2.01% | ALPHABET INC 2.12% |
| Pfizer Inc 2.00% | ROSS STORES INC 2.01% |
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 Pacer US Cash Cows 100 ETF | RDVY First Trust Rising Dividend Achievers ETF | |
|---|---|---|
| Where it sits | Core index fund | Core index fund |
| Issuer | Pacer | First Trust |
| What it is | US Cash Cows 100 | First Rising Dividend Achievers |
| Total return, 1 year | +23.4% | +22.0% |
| S&P 500 over the same days | +17.5% | +17.5% |
| Gap to the S&P 500 | +5.9 pts | +4.5 pts |
| Expense ratio | 0.49% | 0.47% |
| Already in the S&P 500 | 95.8% | 94.4% |
| Holdings | 100 | 71 |
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.
RDVY in plain words
RDVY is an index equity fund tracking the First Rising Dividend Achievers. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +22.0% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.47% 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 71 positions, with the top ten at 28.6%. It sat 3.9% below its high of Aug 13, 2026 on Sep 11, 2026.
Questions people ask
- Which returned more over the last year, COWZ or RDVY?
- In the year to Sep 12, 2026, with distributions reinvested, COWZ returned +23.4% and RDVY returned +22.0%, so COWZ returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.
- Which is cheaper, COWZ or RDVY?
- COWZ charges 0.49% a year and RDVY charges 0.47%, so RDVY is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
- How much do COWZ and RDVY overlap with the S&P 500?
- By their latest filed holdings, 96% of COWZ and 94% of RDVY by weight is stocks the S&P 500 already holds. Between the two funds, 10% 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, COWZ against RDVY, data as of Sep 12, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/any/COWZ-RDVY Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.
A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources