Data as of Oct 28, 2026.

vsCompare their flowsaskIQ about these two fundsAsk the committee about these two funds
Across categories

COWZ vs XLG: Differences, Returns & Fees

Share
Share on XDownload as PDF

Over the year to Oct 28, 2026, COWZ returned +24.4% to XLG's +6.4%; 1% of their weight is in the same names.

askIQ about this page

askIQ about COWZ and XLG

Net assets on Oct 27, 2026: $19.5bn for Pacer US Cash Cows 100 ETF and $11.9bn for Invesco S&P 500 Top 50 ETF.

At a glance
+24.4%
COWZ total return, 1 year
+6.4%
XLG total return, 1 year
0.49%
COWZ expense ratio
0.20%
XLG expense ratio

Pair scorecard

XLG costs 0.29 points a year less; their one-year returns differ by 18.0 points; COWZ is 1.6 times larger.

COWZ vs XLG: Differences, Returns & Fees
MeasureCOWZXLG
Return
Total return, 1 year+24.4%+6.4%
Benchmark
What it tracksPacer US Cash Cows 100 IndexS&P 500 Top 50 Index
Cost and size
Expense ratio0.49%0.20%
Net assets, as of Oct 27, 2026$19.5bn$11.9bn
Holdings
Holdings in common1%
Top ten holdings, share of the fund20.4%60.3%

Holdings in common uses holdings dated Jul 31, 2026 and Oct 27, 2026. Method

Risk and return

Dec 30, 2016 to Oct 23, 2026 · 512 weekly returns
COWZ XLG
Return
Total return edge XLG +251.9% +347.9%
Annualized edge XLG +13.6% +16.5%
Price return edge XLG +188.5% +295.2%
Risk
Volatility edge XLG (slight) 19.6% 17.8%
Max drawdown edge XLG −36.3% −28.7%
Risk-adjusted
Sharpe edge XLG 0.62 0.80
Sortino edge XLG 0.89 1.17
Calmar edge XLG 0.38 0.57
Reading

XLG returned more: +347.9% to +251.9%. XLG swung slightly less: 17.8% to 19.6%. XLG fell less at its worst: −28.7% to −36.3%.

Full scorecard

9 measures, with how each is measured
Open ↓
Risk and return: COWZ vs XLG: Differences, Returns & Fees
MeasureCOWZXLGEdgeHow it is measured
Return
Total return+251.9%+347.9%XLGPrice change plus distributions, reinvested.
Annualized+13.6%+16.5%XLGTotal return as a yearly rate.
Price return+188.5%+295.2%XLGPrice change alone, distributions left out.
Risk
Volatility19.6%17.8%XLG (slight)Spread of weekly returns, annualized. Lower is steadier.
Downside deviation13.8%12.2%XLGLike volatility, counting only weeks below the Treasury bill rate.
Max drawdown−36.3%−28.7%XLGDeepest fall from a high to the low after it.
Risk-adjusted
Sharpe0.620.80XLGReturn above Treasury bills per unit of volatility.
Sortino0.891.17XLGReturn above Treasury bills per unit of downside deviation.
Calmar0.380.57XLGAnnualized return divided by the max drawdown.

Computed by ETFIQ from Tiingo daily prices and ETFIQ's distribution records, 512 weekly returns. Cash rate: the 13-week Treasury bill.

What they share

1%

By the books each fund has filed, COWZ and XLG hold 1% of their money in the same securities at the same weight. Holdings dated Jul 31, 2026 and Oct 27, 2026.

0 half 100%

half

1% in common

Positions both hold · largest shared weight first COWZ XLG
QUALCOMM Inc 1.31% 0.47%
Verizon Communications Inc 1.97% 0.44%
Only in one fund ↓
Only in COWZ
Booking Holdings Inc 2.23%
Bristol-Myers Squibb Co 2.18%
HCA Healthcare Inc 2.07%
Marathon Petroleum Corp 2.06%
General Dynamics Corp 2.05%
Intuit Inc 2.04%
AT&T Inc 1.95%
Gilead Sciences Inc 1.93%
Only in XLG
NVIDIA Corp 12.54%
Apple Inc 12.04%
Microsoft Corp 9.38%
Amazon.com Inc 5.91%
Alphabet Inc 4.47%
Broadcom Inc 3.87%
Alphabet Inc 3.58%
Meta Platforms Inc 3.25%
Check overlap with more funds →

Side by side

COWZ Pacer US Cash Cows 100 ETF XLG Invesco S&P 500 Top 50 ETF
Where it sits Stock ETF Stock ETF
Issuer Pacer Invesco
What it is Tracks an index of US Cash Cows 100 Tracks the S&P 500 top 50
Total return, 1 year +24.4% +6.4%
Its benchmark over the same days not measured +13.7% (IVV)
Gap to its benchmark not measured −7.3 pts vs IVV
Expense ratio 0.49% 0.20%
Already in the S&P 500 94.7% 98.4%
Holdings 100 53
Net assets, as of Oct 27, 2026 $19.5bn $11.9bn

COWZ and XLG on the fields both publish, as of Oct 28, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.

Client brief · page 1 of 2 Report BR-3F1EA54481

COWZ and XLG do different jobs. What does each one do in a portfolio?

  1. What each follows. COWZ follows Pacer US Cash Cows 100 Index and XLG follows S&P 500 Top 50 Index.
  2. Holdings in common. 1% of the weight is in the same securities (holdings dated Jul 31, 2026 and Oct 27, 2026).
  3. One-year total return. Over 1 year to Oct 28, 2026 COWZ returned +24.4% and XLG +6.4% with distributions reinvested, a gap of 18.0 points.

Data as of Oct 28, 2026.

The two-page PDF for this pair is coming. Save the comparison to follow its changes. Free. It needs an email sign-in, once.

Your saved page · Privacy.

Alert

COWZ and XLG flows, by email on Sundays.

One-click unsubscribe. See Privacy.

About each fund
COWZ

COWZ tracks an index of US Cash Cows 100. Over the year to Oct 28, 2026 it returned +24.4% with distributions reinvested. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.49% a year. By its holdings filed for Jul 31, 2026, 95% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 100 positions, with the top ten at 20.4%.

XLG

XLG tracks the S&P 500 top 50. Over the year to Oct 28, 2026 it returned +6.4% with distributions reinvested, against +13.7% for its benchmark, the S&P 500 Index. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.20% a year. By its holdings published by its issuer for Oct 27, 2026, 98% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 53 positions, with the top ten at 60.3%.

Questions people ask

Which returned more over the last year, COWZ or XLG?
In the year to Oct 28, 2026, with distributions reinvested, COWZ returned +24.4% and XLG +6.4%.
Which is cheaper, COWZ or XLG?
XLG is cheaper, by 0.29 percentage points a year. That is about $29 on $10,000 held for a year. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
How much do COWZ and XLG overlap with the S&P 500?
By their latest filed holdings, 95% of COWZ and 98% of XLG by weight is stocks the S&P 500 already holds.
Other comparisons
Cite this pageCitation, APA and Markdown

ETFIQ, COWZ against XLG, data as of Oct 28, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/any/cowz-vs-xlg

Open data →

Free to use with attribution for data ETFIQ computes; issuer data stays under its owner's terms.