COWG vs IVV
Pacer US Large Cap Cash Cows Growth Leaders ETF vs iShares Core S&P 500 ETF
Quick Verdict
IVV has a lower expense ratio. IVV delivered stronger 1-year returns. IVV offers more diversification with 508 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | COWG | IVV | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.49% | 0.03% | |
| AUM | $2.3B | $907.0B | |
| Dividend Yield | 0.37% | 1.10% | |
| Holdings | 102 | 508 | |
| YTD Return | +11.20% | +12.39% | |
| 1Y Return | +13.05% | +20.24% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +22.46% | +21.78% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | - | +12.84% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 15.6% | 15.1% | |
| Max Drawdown | -23.6% | -56.5% | |
| Fund Family | Pacer ETFs | iShares by BlackRock (US) | |
| Category | Equity | Equity | |
| Inception | Dec 21, 2022 | May 15, 2000 |
COWG vs IVV Performance
Pacer US Large Cap Cash Cows Growth Leaders ETF (COWG) is a ETF from Pacer ETFs and iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is a ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US). Over the past year COWG returned +13.05% while IVV returned +20.24%. Year to date, COWG is up 11.20% versus a gain of 12.39% for IVV.
Over three years, COWG compounded at +22.46% per year against +21.78% for IVV. Across the full 4-year window we track, COWG has the edge at +20.59% annualized vs +6.98%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
COWG has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 15.6% compared with 15.1% for IVV. Lower volatility generally means a smoother ride, though it often comes with lower long-run returns.
The deepest peak-to-trough decline in our data was -23.6% for COWG and -56.5% for IVV. Drawdown depth is worth weighing if you expect to sell during market stress rather than ride it out.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.83. They usually move together, but the gap leaves some room for diversification.
Fees and Cost Over Time
COWG charges 0.49% per year while IVV charges 0.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $49 vs $3 annually, a gap of $46 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, COWG currently yields 0.37% against 1.10% for IVV.
Holdings Overlap
COWG and IVV share 63 holdings out of 543 unique holdings combined, representing a 12.3% weight overlap.
Moderate overlap means holding both could provide meaningful diversification benefits.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, COWG or IVV?
COWG has an expense ratio of 0.49% while IVV charges 0.03%. IVV is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $46 per year of difference.
Which performed better, COWG or IVV?
Over the past year COWG returned +13.05% vs +20.24% for IVV, so IVV leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (4 years), COWG annualized +20.59% vs +6.98% for IVV. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, COWG or IVV?
COWG has been the more volatile fund at 15.6% annualized versus 15.1% for IVV. Worst drawdown: COWG -23.6% vs IVV -56.5%.
Should I hold both COWG and IVV?
COWG and IVV have a monthly-return correlation of 0.83, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between COWG and IVV?
COWG and IVV share 63 common holdings with a 12.3% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 543 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, COWG or IVV?
COWG yields 0.37% while IVV yields 1.10%, so IVV currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Popular ETF Comparisons
Get Full ETF Analytics
Access complete holdings data, overlap analysis, screener tools, and more with FundXLS.