ABFL vs. RAFE

Last updated Jul 17, 2026

ABFL (Abacus FCF Leaders ETF) and RAFE (PIMCO RAFI ESG U.S. ETF) are both Large Cap Blend Equities funds. ABFL is actively managed, while RAFE is passively managed. Over the past 5 years, ABFL returned 11.96%/yr vs 11.72%/yr for RAFE. Their correlation of 0.84 suggests significant overlap in exposure. ABFL charges 0.49%/yr vs 0.30%/yr for RAFE.

Performance

ABFL vs. RAFE - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Abacus FCF Leaders ETF (ABFL) and PIMCO RAFI ESG U.S. ETF (RAFE). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both stocks are quite close, with ABFL having a 16.17% return and RAFE slightly lower at 15.75%.

ABFL

• 1D: -0.57%
• 1M: -0.21%
• 6M: 13.50%
• YTD: 16.17%
• 1Y: 19.81%
• 3Y*: 16.42%
• 5Y*: 11.96%
• 10Y*: —

RAFE

• 1D: 0.68%
• 1M: 1.26%
• 6M: 13.22%
• YTD: 15.75%
• 1Y: 28.72%
• 3Y*: 18.68%
• 5Y*: 11.72%
• 10Y*: —

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

ABFL vs. RAFE - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019
ABFL Abacus FCF Leaders ETF	16.17%	8.07%	18.26%	22.97%	-14.60%	30.66%	18.30%	0.75%
RAFE PIMCO RAFI ESG U.S. ETF	15.75%	17.60%	13.81%	18.80%	-13.76%	30.16%	5.29%	0.43%

Correlation

The correlation between ABFL and RAFE is 0.73, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.73
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.82
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.87
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 19, 2019	0.84

The correlation between ABFL and RAFE shifts across timeframes, from 0.73 (1 year) to 0.87 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

ABFL vs. RAFE — Risk / Return Rank

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

ABFL

ABFL Risk / Return Rank: 50
ABFL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 41
ABFL Sortino Ratio Rank: 39
ABFL Omega Ratio Rank: 38
ABFL Calmar Ratio Rank: 69
ABFL Martin Ratio Rank: 62

RAFE

RAFE Risk / Return Rank: 90
RAFE Sharpe Ratio Rank: 92
RAFE Sortino Ratio Rank: 92
RAFE Omega Ratio Rank: 90
RAFE Calmar Ratio Rank: 86
RAFE Martin Ratio Rank: 88

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.

ABFL vs. RAFE - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Abacus FCF Leaders ETF (ABFL) and PIMCO RAFI ESG U.S. ETF (RAFE). 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.

Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.

	ABFL	RAFE	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.20	2.55	-1.36
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.70	3.57	-1.87
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.21	1.46	-0.25
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.78	3.87	-1.09
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	8.65	15.07	-6.43

ABFL vs. RAFE - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ABFL Sharpe Ratio is 1.20, which is lower than the RAFE Sharpe Ratio of 2.55. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ABFL and RAFE, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

ABFL vs. RAFE - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ABFL drawdown since its inception was -34.95%, roughly equal to the maximum RAFE drawdown of -35.74%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ABFL and RAFE.

Drawdown Indicators

	ABFL	RAFE	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-34.95%	-35.74%	+0.79%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-7.17%	-7.46%	+0.29%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-19.92%	-16.36%	-3.56%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-21.88%	-24.28%	+2.40%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-3.79%	-0.02%	-3.77%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-4.95%	-6.12%	+1.17%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.30%	1.91%	+0.39%

Volatility

ABFL vs. RAFE - Volatility Comparison

Abacus FCF Leaders ETF (ABFL) has a higher volatility of 6.00% compared to PIMCO RAFI ESG U.S. ETF (RAFE) at 2.19%. This indicates that ABFL's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than RAFE based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	ABFL	RAFE	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.00%	2.19%	+3.81%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	13.53%	8.62%	+4.91%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	16.63%	11.31%	+5.32%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	17.39%	15.06%	+2.33%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	18.77%	19.31%	-0.54%

ABFL vs. RAFE - Expense Ratio Comparison

ABFL has a 0.49% expense ratio, which is higher than RAFE's 0.30% expense ratio.

Dividends

ABFL vs. RAFE - Dividend Comparison

ABFL's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.54%, less than RAFE's 1.49% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
ABFL Abacus FCF Leaders ETF	0.54%	0.62%	0.70%	0.94%	1.36%	9.63%	0.41%	0.72%	0.62%	0.40%
RAFE PIMCO RAFI ESG U.S. ETF	1.49%	1.67%	1.79%	1.81%	2.22%	1.42%	2.36%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both ABFL and RAFE in my portfolio?

ABFL and RAFE have a correlation of 0.73, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, ABFL or RAFE?

ABFL has higher volatility (6.00%) compared to RAFE (2.19%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ABFL dropped -34.95% vs RAFE's -35.74%.

Which ETF is better, ABFL or RAFE?

On 5-year performance, ABFL leads with 11.96% vs 11.72% for RAFE. On fees, RAFE is cheaper at 0.30% per year. On volatility, RAFE has been the lower-risk option at 2.19%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, ABFL or RAFE?

Over the 5-year period, ABFL has performed better with a 11.96% return vs 11.72%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, ABFL or RAFE?

RAFE is cheaper with a 0.30% expense ratio, compared with 0.49% for ABFL.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, ABFL or RAFE?

RAFE has the higher dividend yield at 1.49%, compared with 0.54% for ABFL.

What is the main difference between ABFL and RAFE?

They also come from different issuers: Abacus and PIMCO. Their fees differ too: 0.49% for ABFL and 0.30% for RAFE.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

RAFE currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.55 vs 1.20), 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.