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 VGT: how they differ

COWZ and VGT hold 5% of their weight in the same names, and VGT returned more over the year.

Pacer US Cash Cows 100 ETF and Vanguard Information Technology Index Fund.

What they hold in common

By the books each fund has filed, COWZ and VGT hold 5% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.

Positions COWZ and VGT both hold, largest shared weight first
HoldingCOWZVGT
QUALCOMM Inc2.67%1.09%
Salesforce Inc1.76%0.70%
Adobe Inc1.75%0.45%
Intuit Inc1.63%0.37%
ON Semiconductor Corp0.84%0.26%
Autodesk Inc0.72%0.23%
NetApp Inc0.59%0.22%
Jabil Inc0.55%0.20%
First Solar Inc0.42%0.19%
Twilio Inc0.36%0.18%
Roper Technologies Inc0.78%0.17%
Zoom Communications Inc0.80%0.16%
Largest positions each one holds and the other does not
Only in COWZOnly in VGT
Altria Group Inc 2.21%NVIDIA Corp 16.85%
ConocoPhillips 2.17%Apple Inc 14.59%
CVS Health Corp 2.16%Microsoft Corp 9.47%
Bristol-Myers Squibb Co 2.03%Broadcom Inc 4.21%
Ford Motor Co 2.01%Micron Technology Inc 4.21%
Uber Technologies Inc 2.01%Advanced Micro Devices Inc 3.21%
Pfizer Inc 2.00%Intel Corp 2.03%
Diamondback Energy Inc 1.99%Cisco Systems Inc 1.85%

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 VGT on the fields both publish, as of Sep 12, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.
COWZ
Pacer US Cash Cows 100 ETF
VGT
Vanguard Information Technology Index Fund
Where it sitsCore index fundCore index fund
IssuerPacerVanguard
What it isUS Cash Cows 100Information technology
Total return, 1 year+23.4%+35.4%
S&P 500 over the same days+17.5%+17.5%
Gap to the S&P 500+5.9 pts+17.9 pts
Expense ratio0.49%0.09%
Already in the S&P 50095.8%86.9%
Holdings100317

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.

VGT in plain words

VGT is an index equity fund tracking the Information technology. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +35.4% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.09% a year. By its holdings filed for May 31, 2026, 87% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 317 positions, with the top ten at 59.5%. It sat 3.6% below its high of Jun 2, 2026 on Sep 11, 2026.

Questions people ask

Which returned more over the last year, COWZ or VGT?
In the year to Sep 12, 2026, with distributions reinvested, COWZ returned +23.4% and VGT returned +35.4%, so VGT returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.
Which is cheaper, COWZ or VGT?
COWZ charges 0.49% a year and VGT charges 0.09%, so VGT is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
How much do COWZ and VGT overlap with the S&P 500?
By their latest filed holdings, 96% of COWZ and 87% of VGT by weight is stocks the S&P 500 already holds. Between the two funds, 5% 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 VGT, 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 VGT, data as of Sep 12, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/any/COWZ-VGT Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.

A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources