COWG vs FLCG
Pacer US Large Cap Cash Cows Growth Leaders ETF vs Federated Hermes MDT Large Cap Growth ETF
Which is better, COWG or FLCG?
COWG has been ahead.
FLCG has a lower expense ratio. COWG led over 1Y and the full window. COWG is less concentrated, with 32.7% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 56.5%.
MarketXLS is not an investment adviser. This comparison is generated automatically from market data and is for information only. A Best mark means the better reading on that one measure, not a recommendation to buy.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | COWG | FLCG |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.49% | 0.39%Best |
| AUM | $2.4B | $687M |
| Dividend Yield | 0.75% | 0.04% |
| Holdings | 204 | 208 |
| YTD Return | +13.88%Best | +7.29% |
| 1Y Return | +13.28%Best | +9.89% |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +22.86% | - |
| Volatility (annualized) | 16.2% | 15.3%Best |
| Max Drawdown | -23.6% | -22.9%Best |
| $10,000 over 2.2 years | $15,003Best | $14,083 |
| Top 10 Weight | 32.7%Best | 56.5% |
| Fund Family | Pacer ETFs | Federated Hermes |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Growth | Large Cap Growth |
| Inception | Dec 21, 2022 | Jul 30, 2024 |
Not shown on this pair: 5Y Return (annualized).
Volatility and max drawdown, and the $10,000 over 2.2 years row, are measured over the window both funds cover: Jul 31, 2024 to Oct 14, 2026 (2.2 years).
COWG vs FLCG growth
Month-end closes. Both lines start at 0% in the first month shown, so the gap between them is the difference in growth across that window. The full view covers the 2.2 years both funds cover.
COWG vs FLCG Performance
Pacer US Large Cap Cash Cows Growth Leaders ETF (COWG) is an ETF from Pacer ETFs and Federated Hermes MDT Large Cap Growth ETF (FLCG) is an ETF from Federated Hermes. Over the past year COWG returned +13.28% while FLCG returned +9.89%. Year to date, COWG is up 13.88% versus a gain of 7.29% for FLCG.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
COWG has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 16.2% compared with 15.3% for FLCG. 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 -22.9% for FLCG. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.74. They usually move together, but the gap leaves some room for diversification.
Fees and Cost Over Time
COWG charges 0.49% per year while FLCG charges 0.39%. On a $10,000 position that is $49 vs $39 annually, a gap of $10 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, COWG currently yields 0.75% against 0.04% for FLCG.
Holdings Overlap
42.8% of COWG's money is in holdings FLCG also owns. 47.5% of FLCG's money is in holdings COWG also owns.
The two portfolios partly overlap.
33 positions in common, counted across the 100 positions we hold weights for in COWG and 100 in FLCG, against full books of 204 and 208.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 62 positions for FLCG that do not appear in our book for COWG (51.8% of the fund), and 65 for COWG that do not appear in FLCG (53.4%).
Some of those will be the same company recorded under a different code in one of the two books, so the real difference in what you would own is no larger than this and may be smaller. We do not name the individual positions here for that reason.
Top Shared Holdings
| Stock | Weight in COWG | Weight in FLCG | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| NVDANvidia Corp | 0.94% | 15.20% | 14.26% |
| AAPLApple, Inc | 0.88% | 7.97% | 7.09% |
| CRWDCrowdstrike Holdings Inc | 3.78% | 2.73% | 1.05% |
| MUMicron Technology, Inc. | 3.26% | 2.76% | 0.50% |
| FTNTFortinet Inc | 3.15% | 1.91% | 1.24% |
| PANWPalo Alto Networks, Inc | 3.60% | 0.50% | 3.10% |
| ANETArista Networks Inc. | 1.46% | 2.58% | 1.12% |
| SNDKVSandisk Corp. | 3.11% | 0.92% | 2.19% |
| AVGOBroadcom Inc | 0.74% | 3.10% | 2.36% |
| DDOGDatadog Inc | 3.46% | 0.12% | 3.34% |
47.5% of FLCG is already inside COWG.
You probably hold more than these two. Add the rest and see how much of the whole book is the same companies twice.
Free for up to 10 holdings. No account needed.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, COWG or FLCG?
COWG has an expense ratio of 0.49% while FLCG charges 0.39%. FLCG is the cheaper option, by $10 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, COWG or FLCG?
Over the past year COWG returned +13.28% vs +9.89% for FLCG, so COWG leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (2 years), COWG annualized +20.25% vs +16.84% for FLCG. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, COWG or FLCG?
COWG has been the more volatile fund at 16.2% annualized versus 15.3% for FLCG. Worst drawdown: COWG -23.6% vs FLCG -22.9%.
Should I hold both COWG and FLCG?
COWG and FLCG have a monthly-return correlation of 0.74, so their returns are far enough apart for the mix to behave differently from either one alone. This is information, not a recommendation.
What is the holdings overlap between COWG and FLCG?
47.5% of FLCG's money is in holdings COWG also owns. 47.5% of FLCG's is in holdings COWG also owns. They hold 33 positions in common, counted across the 100 positions we hold weights for in COWG and 100 in FLCG.
Which pays a higher dividend, COWG or FLCG?
COWG yields 0.75% while FLCG yields 0.04%, so COWG currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is FLCG better than COWG?
FLCG has a lower expense ratio. COWG led over 1Y and the full window. COWG is less concentrated, with 32.7% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 56.5%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.