Data as of Sep 12, 2026. Both funds on the fields they both publish, from the same sources.
COWZ vs SPHD: how they differ
COWZ and SPHD hold 16% of their weight in the same names, and COWZ returned more over the year.
Pacer US Cash Cows 100 ETF and Invesco S&P 500 High Dividend Low Volatility ETF.
What they hold in common
By the books each fund has filed, COWZ and SPHD hold 16% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.
| Holding | COWZ | SPHD |
|---|---|---|
| Altria Group Inc | 2.21% | 3.45% |
| Bristol-Myers Squibb Co | 2.03% | 2.08% |
| Pfizer Inc | 2.00% | 2.99% |
| Verizon Communications Inc | 1.90% | 3.49% |
| AT&T Inc | 1.84% | 2.02% |
| Comcast Corp | 1.71% | 1.60% |
| EOG Resources Inc | 1.23% | 1.99% |
| Kraft Heinz Co/The | 1.13% | 3.03% |
| Omnicom Group Inc | 0.84% | 1.43% |
| Paychex Inc | 0.59% | 1.46% |
| General Mills Inc | 0.47% | 1.72% |
| Only in COWZ | Only in SPHD |
|---|---|
| QUALCOMM Inc 2.67% | Healthpeak Properties, Inc. 3.24% |
| ConocoPhillips 2.17% | Franklin Resources, Inc. 2.82% |
| CVS Health Corp 2.16% | VICI Properties Inc. 2.68% |
| Ford Motor Co 2.01% | ONEOK, Inc. 2.66% |
| Uber Technologies Inc 2.01% | Kimco Realty Corp. 2.46% |
| Diamondback Energy Inc 1.99% | Realty Income Corp. 2.43% |
| Newmont Corp 1.93% | Amcor PLC 2.41% |
| Booking Holdings Inc 1.87% | Crown Castle Inc. 2.41% |
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 Pacer US Cash Cows 100 ETF | SPHD Invesco S&P 500 High Dividend Low Volatility ETF | |
|---|---|---|
| Where it sits | Core index fund | Core index fund |
| Issuer | Pacer | Invesco |
| What it is | US Cash Cows 100 | S&P 500 High Dividend Low Volatility |
| Total return, 1 year | +23.4% | +8.6% |
| S&P 500 over the same days | +17.5% | +17.5% |
| Gap to the S&P 500 | +5.9 pts | −8.9 pts |
| Expense ratio | 0.49% | 0.30% |
| Already in the S&P 500 | 95.8% | 95.7% |
| Holdings | 100 | 49 |
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.
SPHD in plain words
SPHD is an index equity fund tracking the S&P 500 High Dividend Low Volatility. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +8.6% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.30% a year. By its holdings filed for May 31, 2026, 96% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 49 positions, with the top ten at 29.3%. It sat 4.1% below its high of Aug 24, 2026 on Sep 11, 2026.
Questions people ask
- Which returned more over the last year, COWZ or SPHD?
- In the year to Sep 12, 2026, with distributions reinvested, COWZ returned +23.4% and SPHD returned +8.6%, so COWZ returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.
- Which is cheaper, COWZ or SPHD?
- COWZ charges 0.49% a year and SPHD charges 0.30%, so SPHD is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
- How much do COWZ and SPHD overlap with the S&P 500?
- By their latest filed holdings, 96% of COWZ and 96% of SPHD 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.
Cite this page. ETFIQ, COWZ against SPHD, data as of Sep 12, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/any/COWZ-SPHD Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.
A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources