AAVM vs. MFUS

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

AAVM (Alpha Architect Global Factor Equity ETF) and MFUS (PIMCO RAFI Dynamic Multi-Factor U.S. Equity ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - AAVM is a Multi-factor fund actively managed by Alpha Architect, while MFUS is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund tracking the RAFI Dynamic Multi-Factor U.S. Index​. AAVM is actively managed, while MFUS is passively managed. Over the past 5 years, AAVM returned 6.94%/yr vs 12.82%/yr for MFUS. A 0.72 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. AAVM charges 0.45%/yr vs 0.30%/yr for MFUS.

Performance

AAVM vs. MFUS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Alpha Architect Global Factor Equity ETF (AAVM) and PIMCO RAFI Dynamic Multi-Factor U.S. Equity ETF (MFUS). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, AAVM achieves a 17.28% return, which is significantly higher than MFUS's 16.37% return.

AAVM

• 1D: -0.37%
• 1M: 3.80%
• YTD: 17.28%
• 6M: 20.07%
• 1Y: 34.59%
• 3Y*: 19.57%
• 5Y*: 6.94%
• 10Y*: —

MFUS

• 1D: 0.03%
• 1M: 5.72%
• YTD: 16.37%
• 6M: 16.58%
• 1Y: 28.04%
• 3Y*: 22.25%
• 5Y*: 12.82%
• 10Y*: —

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

AAVM vs. MFUS - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
AAVM Alpha Architect Global Factor Equity ETF	17.28%	18.54%	12.07%	-0.74%	-7.00%	3.52%	4.69%	4.59%	-15.64%	10.88%
MFUS PIMCO RAFI Dynamic Multi-Factor U.S. Equity ETF	16.37%	16.02%	20.17%	12.19%	-5.82%	24.10%	10.64%	26.17%	-7.30%	11.20%

Correlation

The correlation between AAVM and MFUS is 0.83, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.83
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.84
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.72
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 7, 2017	0.72

The correlation between AAVM and MFUS shifts across timeframes, from 0.72 (5 years) to 0.84 (3 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

AAVM vs. MFUS - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	AAVM	MFUS
Industrials	28.7%	12.6%
Basic Materials	15.4%	2.8%
Consumer Cyclical	15.3%	10.6%
Technology	14.4%	21.8%
Energy	6.0%	7.0%
Healthcare	5.8%	13.5%
Utilities	4.3%	1.7%
Consumer Defensive	4.0%	10.3%
Communication Services	3.4%	5.3%
Real Estate	1.4%	1.8%
Financial Services	1.3%	12.6%

Return for Risk

AAVM vs. MFUS — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

AAVM

AAVM Risk / Return Rank: 69
AAVM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 69
AAVM Sortino Ratio Rank: 70
AAVM Omega Ratio Rank: 69
AAVM Calmar Ratio Rank: 65
AAVM Martin Ratio Rank: 72

MFUS

MFUS Risk / Return Rank: 82
MFUS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 80
MFUS Sortino Ratio Rank: 83
MFUS Omega Ratio Rank: 78
MFUS Calmar Ratio Rank: 83
MFUS Martin Ratio Rank: 86

The rank (0–100) shows how this investment's returns compare to the risk taken. Higher = better. Based on the past 12 months of data, combining Sharpe, Sortino, and other metrics used by quantitative funds and institutional investors.

AAVM vs. MFUS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Alpha Architect Global Factor Equity ETF (AAVM) and PIMCO RAFI Dynamic Multi-Factor U.S. Equity ETF (MFUS). Risk-adjusted metrics are performance indicators that assess an investment's returns in relation to its risk, enabling a more accurate comparison of different investment options.

	AAVM	MFUS	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.28	2.63	-0.35
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.20	3.77	-0.57
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.42	1.47	-0.05
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.20	4.41	-1.21
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	13.42	18.13	-4.71
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

AAVM vs. MFUS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current AAVM Sharpe Ratio is 2.28, which is comparable to the MFUS Sharpe Ratio of 2.63. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of AAVM and MFUS, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	AAVM	MFUS	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.28	2.63	-0.35
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.44	0.86	-0.41
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.35	0.79	-0.44

Drawdowns

AAVM vs. MFUS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum AAVM drawdown since its inception was -34.71%, roughly equal to the maximum MFUS drawdown of -35.21%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for AAVM and MFUS.

Drawdown Indicators

	AAVM	MFUS	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-34.71%	-35.21%	+0.50%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-10.85%	-6.39%	-4.46%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-20.23%	-15.39%	-4.84%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-23.73%	-18.22%	-5.51%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.55%	0.00%	-0.55%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-13.32%	-4.00%	-9.32%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.58%	1.55%	+1.03%

Volatility

AAVM vs. MFUS - Volatility Comparison

Alpha Architect Global Factor Equity ETF (AAVM) has a higher volatility of 5.00% compared to PIMCO RAFI Dynamic Multi-Factor U.S. Equity ETF (MFUS) at 3.19%. This indicates that AAVM's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than MFUS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	AAVM	MFUS	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.00%	3.19%	+1.81%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	12.87%	8.22%	+4.65%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	15.26%	10.72%	+4.54%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	15.68%	15.03%	+0.65%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	14.90%	17.35%	-2.45%

AAVM vs. MFUS - Expense Ratio Comparison

AAVM has a 0.45% expense ratio, which is higher than MFUS's 0.30% expense ratio.

Dividends

AAVM vs. MFUS - Dividend Comparison

AAVM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.75%, more than MFUS's 1.36% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
AAVM Alpha Architect Global Factor Equity ETF	1.75%	2.05%	2.54%	4.13%	2.24%	0.82%	0.00%	1.76%	0.93%	0.81%
MFUS PIMCO RAFI Dynamic Multi-Factor U.S. Equity ETF	1.36%	1.54%	1.45%	1.96%	2.07%	1.35%	1.72%	1.89%	1.69%	1.01%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both AAVM and MFUS in my portfolio?

AAVM and MFUS have a correlation of 0.83, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, AAVM or MFUS?

AAVM has higher volatility (5.00%) compared to MFUS (3.19%). In terms of maximum drawdown, AAVM dropped -34.71% vs MFUS's -35.21%.

Which ETF is better, AAVM or MFUS?

On 5-year performance, MFUS leads with 12.82% vs 6.94% for AAVM. On fees, MFUS is cheaper at 0.30% per year. On volatility, MFUS has been the lower-risk option at 3.19%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, AAVM or MFUS?

Over the 5-year period, MFUS has performed better with a 12.82% return vs 6.94%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, AAVM or MFUS?

MFUS is cheaper with a 0.30% expense ratio, compared with 0.45% for AAVM.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, AAVM or MFUS?

AAVM has the higher dividend yield at 1.75%, compared with 1.36% for MFUS.

What is the main difference between AAVM and MFUS?

AAVM is categorized as Multi-factor, while MFUS is Large Cap Growth Equities. They also come from different issuers: Alpha Architect and PIMCO. Their fees differ too: 0.45% for AAVM and 0.30% for MFUS.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

MFUS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.63 vs 2.28), meaning it's delivered slightly more return per unit of risk over the trailing 12 months. However, this ranking shifts over time - use the Risk/Return Score above for a more comprehensive view that combines Sharpe, Sortino, and other measures used by quantitative funds.