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 XLK: how they differ

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

Pacer US Cash Cows 100 ETF and State Street(R) Technology Select Sector SPDR(R) ETF.

What they hold in common

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

Positions COWZ and XLK both hold, largest shared weight first
HoldingCOWZXLK
QUALCOMM Inc2.67%1.09%
Salesforce Inc1.76%0.71%
Adobe Inc1.75%0.46%
Intuit Inc1.63%0.40%
Autodesk Inc0.72%0.23%
Jabil Inc0.55%0.23%
ON Semiconductor Corp0.84%0.21%
Roper Technologies Inc0.78%0.19%
NetApp Inc0.59%0.17%
First Solar Inc0.42%0.14%
Workday Inc0.75%0.14%
F5 Inc0.32%0.13%
Largest positions each one holds and the other does not
Only in COWZOnly in XLK
Altria Group Inc 2.21%NVIDIA Corp 14.66%
ConocoPhillips 2.17%Apple Inc 12.86%
CVS Health Corp 2.16%Microsoft Corp 8.38%
Bristol-Myers Squibb Co 2.03%Micron Technology Inc 5.42%
Ford Motor Co 2.01%Broadcom Inc 5.41%
Uber Technologies Inc 2.01%Advanced Micro Devices Inc 5.28%
Pfizer Inc 2.00%Intel Corp 3.68%
Diamondback Energy Inc 1.99%Applied Materials Inc 3.20%

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 XLK on the fields both publish, as of Sep 12, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.
COWZ
Pacer US Cash Cows 100 ETF
XLK
State Street(R) Technology Select Sector SPDR(R) ETF
Where it sitsCore index fundCore index fund
IssuerPacerState Street
What it isUS Cash Cows 100Technology
Total return, 1 year+23.4%+39.2%
S&P 500 over the same days+17.5%+17.5%
Gap to the S&P 500+5.9 pts+21.7 pts
Expense ratio0.49%0.08%
Already in the S&P 50095.8%100.0%
Holdings10074

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.

XLK in plain words

XLK is an index equity fund tracking the Technology. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +39.2% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.08% a year. By its holdings filed for Jun 30, 2026, 100% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 74 positions, with the top ten at 64.5%. It sat 5.2% below its high of Jun 2, 2026 on Sep 11, 2026.

Questions people ask

Which returned more over the last year, COWZ or XLK?
In the year to Sep 12, 2026, with distributions reinvested, COWZ returned +23.4% and XLK returned +39.2%, so XLK returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.
Which is cheaper, COWZ or XLK?
COWZ charges 0.49% a year and XLK charges 0.08%, so XLK is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
How much do COWZ and XLK overlap with the S&P 500?
By their latest filed holdings, 96% of COWZ and 100% of XLK 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 XLK, 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 XLK, data as of Sep 12, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/any/COWZ-XLK Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.

A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources