COWG vs HQGO
Pacer US Large Cap Cash Cows Growth Leaders ETF vs Hartford US Quality Growth ETF
Which is better, COWG or HQGO?
Each has led over a different period.
HQGO has a lower expense ratio. COWG led over the full window, HQGO over 1Y. COWG is less concentrated, with 32.7% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 38.1%.
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 | HQGO |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.49% | 0.34%Best |
| AUM | $2.4B | $3M |
| Dividend Yield | 0.75% | 0.51% |
| Holdings | 204 | 192 |
| YTD Return | +13.88%Best | +12.84% |
| 1Y Return | +13.28% | +15.94%Best |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +22.86% | - |
| Volatility (annualized) | 15.5% | 12.6%Best |
| Max Drawdown | -23.6% | -20.9%Best |
| $10,000 over 2.9 years | $18,305Best | $17,373 |
| Top 10 Weight | 32.7%Best | 38.1% |
| Fund Family | Pacer ETFs | Hartford Funds |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Growth | Large Cap Growth |
| Inception | Dec 21, 2022 | Dec 5, 2023 |
Not shown on this pair: 5Y Return (annualized).
Volatility and max drawdown, and the $10,000 over 2.9 years row, are measured over the window both funds cover: Dec 6, 2023 to Oct 14, 2026 (2.9 years).
COWG vs HQGO 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 2.9 years both funds cover.
COWG vs HQGO Performance
Pacer US Large Cap Cash Cows Growth Leaders ETF (COWG) is an ETF from Pacer ETFs and Hartford US Quality Growth ETF (HQGO) is an ETF from Hartford Funds. Over the past year COWG returned +13.28% while HQGO returned +15.94%. Year to date, COWG is up 13.88% versus a gain of 12.84% for HQGO.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
COWG has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 15.5% compared with 12.6% for HQGO. 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 -20.9% for HQGO. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
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 HQGO charges 0.34%. On a $10,000 position that is $49 vs $34 annually, a gap of $15 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, COWG currently yields 0.75% against 0.51% for HQGO.
Holdings Overlap
55.4% of COWG's money is in holdings HQGO also owns. 34.4% of HQGO's money is in holdings COWG also owns.
The two portfolios partly overlap.
49 positions in common, counted across the 100 positions we hold weights for in COWG and 190 in HQGO, against full books of 204 and 192.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 140 positions for HQGO that do not appear in our book for COWG (65.5% of the fund), and 50 for COWG that do not appear in HQGO (43.9%).
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 HQGO | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| NVDANvidia Corp | 0.94% | 5.49% | 4.55% |
| AAPLApple, Inc | 0.88% | 5.37% | 4.49% |
| MUMicron Technology, Inc. | 3.26% | 2.27% | 0.99% |
| CRWDCrowdstrike Holdings Inc | 3.78% | 0.53% | 3.25% |
| FTNTFortinet Inc | 3.15% | 0.99% | 2.16% |
| AVGOBroadcom Inc | 0.74% | 3.36% | 2.62% |
| SNDKVSandisk Corp. | 3.11% | 0.82% | 2.29% |
| DDOGDatadog Inc | 3.46% | 0.32% | 3.14% |
| CRDO:KYCredo Technology Group Holding Ltd | 3.03% | 0.19% | 2.84% |
| NTNXNutanix Inc - A | 2.12% | 0.28% | 1.84% |
55.4% of COWG is already inside HQGO.
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 HQGO?
COWG has an expense ratio of 0.49% while HQGO charges 0.34%. HQGO is the cheaper option, by $15 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, COWG or HQGO?
Over the past year COWG returned +13.28% vs +15.94% for HQGO, so HQGO leads on 1-year performance. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, COWG or HQGO?
COWG has been the more volatile fund at 15.5% annualized versus 12.6% for HQGO. Worst drawdown: COWG -23.6% vs HQGO -20.9%.
Should I hold both COWG and HQGO?
COWG and HQGO have a monthly-return correlation of 0.83, 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 HQGO?
55.4% of COWG's money is in holdings HQGO also owns. 34.4% of HQGO's is in holdings COWG also owns. They hold 49 positions in common, counted across the 100 positions we hold weights for in COWG and 190 in HQGO.
Which pays a higher dividend, COWG or HQGO?
COWG yields 0.75% while HQGO yields 0.51%, so COWG currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is HQGO better than COWG?
HQGO has a lower expense ratio. COWG led over the full window, HQGO over 1Y. COWG is less concentrated, with 32.7% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 38.1%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.