COWG vs PGRO
Pacer US Large Cap Cash Cows Growth Leaders ETF vs Putnam Focused Large Cap Growth ETF
Which is better, COWG or PGRO?
Each has led over a different period.
COWG led over 1Y and 3Y, PGRO over the full window. COWG is less concentrated, with 32.7% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 58.8%.
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 | PGRO |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.49%Tie | 0.49%Tie |
| AUM | $2.4B | $222M |
| Dividend Yield | 0.75% | 0.02% |
| Holdings | 204 | 43 |
| YTD Return | +13.88%Best | +7.57% |
| 1Y Return | +13.28%Best | +8.94% |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +22.86%Best | +22.58% |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | - | +11.60% |
| Volatility (annualized) | 15.4%Best | 16.5% |
| Max Drawdown | -23.6% | -23.3%Best |
| $10,000 over 3.8 years | $20,325 | $23,885Best |
| Top 10 Weight | 32.7%Best | 58.8% |
| Fund Family | Pacer ETFs | Putnam Investments |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Growth | Large Cap Growth |
| Inception | Dec 21, 2022 | May 25, 2021 |
Volatility and max drawdown, and the $10,000 over 3.8 years row, are measured over the window both funds cover: Dec 23, 2022 to Oct 14, 2026 (3.8 years).
COWG vs PGRO 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 3.8 years both funds cover.
COWG vs PGRO Performance
Pacer US Large Cap Cash Cows Growth Leaders ETF (COWG) is an ETF from Pacer ETFs and Putnam Focused Large Cap Growth ETF (PGRO) is an ETF from Putnam Investments. Over the past year COWG returned +13.28% while PGRO returned +8.94%. Year to date, COWG is up 13.88% versus a gain of 7.57% for PGRO.
Over three years, COWG compounded at +22.86% per year against +22.58% for PGRO. Across the full 4-year window we track, PGRO has the edge at +25.75% annualized vs +20.52%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
PGRO has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 16.5% compared with 15.4% for COWG. 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 -23.3% for PGRO. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.79. They usually move together, but the gap leaves some room for diversification.
Fees and Cost Over Time
COWG charges 0.49% per year while PGRO charges 0.49%. On a $10,000 position that is $49 vs $49 annually. On income, COWG currently yields 0.75% against 0.02% for PGRO.
Holdings Overlap
15.1% of COWG's money is in holdings PGRO also owns. 39.3% of PGRO's money is in holdings COWG also owns.
The two portfolios partly overlap.
12 positions in common, counted across the 100 positions we hold weights for in COWG and 40 in PGRO, against full books of 204 and 43.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 27 positions for PGRO that do not appear in our book for COWG (59.7% of the fund), and 86 for COWG that do not appear in PGRO (81.2%).
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 PGRO | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| NVDANvidia Corp | 0.94% | 14.08% | 13.14% |
| AAPLApple, Inc | 0.88% | 6.38% | 5.50% |
| MUMicron Technology, Inc. | 3.26% | 3.52% | 0.26% |
| AVGOBroadcom Inc | 0.74% | 4.75% | 4.01% |
| PANWPalo Alto Networks, Inc | 3.60% | 1.54% | 2.06% |
| PLTRPalantir Technologies Inc | 1.27% | 1.48% | 0.21% |
| CDNSCadence Design Systems Inc. | 0.84% | 1.75% | 0.91% |
| GEVGe Vernova, Inc. | 0.55% | 1.98% | 1.43% |
| WDCWestern Digital Corp. | 1.65% | 0.86% | 0.79% |
| ISRGIntuitive Surgical Inc. | 0.32% | 1.30% | 0.98% |
39.3% of PGRO 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 PGRO?
COWG has an expense ratio of 0.49% while PGRO charges 0.49%. At the precision these are quoted to, they cost the same.
Which performed better, COWG or PGRO?
Over the past year COWG returned +13.28% vs +8.94% for PGRO, so COWG leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (4 years), COWG annualized +20.52% vs +25.75% for PGRO. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, COWG or PGRO?
PGRO has been the more volatile fund at 16.5% annualized versus 15.4% for COWG. Worst drawdown: COWG -23.6% vs PGRO -23.3%.
Should I hold both COWG and PGRO?
COWG and PGRO have a monthly-return correlation of 0.79, 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 PGRO?
39.3% of PGRO's money is in holdings COWG also owns. 39.3% of PGRO's is in holdings COWG also owns. They hold 12 positions in common, counted across the 100 positions we hold weights for in COWG and 40 in PGRO.
Which pays a higher dividend, COWG or PGRO?
COWG yields 0.75% while PGRO yields 0.02%, so COWG currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is PGRO better than COWG?
COWG led over 1Y and 3Y, PGRO over the full window. COWG is less concentrated, with 32.7% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 58.8%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.