GCOW vs IVV
Pacer Global Cash Cows Dividend ETF vs iShares Core S&P 500 ETF
Quick Verdict
IVV has a lower expense ratio. GCOW delivered stronger 1-year returns. IVV offers more diversification with 508 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | GCOW | IVV | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.60% | 0.03% | |
| AUM | $3.5B | $907.0B | |
| Dividend Yield | 4.58% | 1.10% | |
| Holdings | 109 | 508 | |
| YTD Return | +15.04% | +12.39% | |
| 1Y Return | +20.28% | +20.24% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +16.85% | +21.78% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +13.09% | +12.84% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 15.2% | 15.1% | |
| Max Drawdown | -37.6% | -56.5% | |
| Fund Family | Pacer ETFs | iShares by BlackRock (US) | |
| Category | Equity | Equity | |
| Inception | Feb 22, 2016 | May 15, 2000 |
GCOW vs IVV Performance
Pacer Global Cash Cows Dividend ETF (GCOW) 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 GCOW returned +20.28% while IVV returned +20.24%. Year to date, GCOW is up 15.04% versus a gain of 12.39% for IVV.
Over three years, GCOW compounded at +16.85% per year against +21.78% for IVV; over five years the annualized figures are +13.09% and +12.84% respectively. Across the full 11-year window we track, GCOW has the edge at +10.48% annualized vs +6.98%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
GCOW has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 15.2% 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 -37.6% for GCOW 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 0.71. They usually move together, but the gap leaves some room for diversification.
Fees and Cost Over Time
GCOW charges 0.60% per year while IVV charges 0.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $60 vs $3 annually, a gap of $57 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, GCOW currently yields 4.58% against 1.10% for IVV.
Holdings Overlap
GCOW and IVV share 11 holdings out of 592 unique holdings combined, representing a 2.7% weight overlap.
Moderate overlap means holding both could provide meaningful diversification benefits.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, GCOW or IVV?
GCOW has an expense ratio of 0.60% while IVV charges 0.03%. IVV is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $57 per year of difference.
Which performed better, GCOW or IVV?
Over the past year GCOW returned +20.28% vs +20.24% for IVV, so GCOW leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (11 years), GCOW annualized +10.48% vs +6.98% for IVV. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, GCOW or IVV?
GCOW has been the more volatile fund at 15.2% annualized versus 15.1% for IVV. Worst drawdown: GCOW -37.6% vs IVV -56.5%.
Should I hold both GCOW and IVV?
GCOW and IVV have a monthly-return correlation of 0.71, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between GCOW and IVV?
GCOW and IVV share 11 common holdings with a 2.7% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 592 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, GCOW or IVV?
GCOW yields 4.58% while IVV yields 1.10%, so GCOW 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.