AFMC vs. EPU

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

AFMC (First Trust Active Factor Mid Cap ETF) and EPU (iShares MSCI Peru ETF) are both Mid Cap Blend Equities funds. AFMC is actively managed, while EPU is passively managed. Over the past 5 years, AFMC returned 10.79%/yr vs 29.75%/yr for EPU. At a 0.49 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. AFMC charges 0.65%/yr vs 0.59%/yr for EPU.

Performance

AFMC vs. EPU - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in First Trust Active Factor Mid Cap ETF (AFMC) and iShares MSCI Peru ETF (EPU). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, AFMC achieves a 16.92% return, which is significantly lower than EPU's 18.54% return.

AFMC

• 1D: -0.98%
• 1M: 2.29%
• YTD: 16.92%
• 6M: 14.64%
• 1Y: 27.95%
• 3Y*: 20.04%
• 5Y*: 10.79%
• 10Y*: —

EPU

• 1D: -3.70%
• 1M: 3.83%
• YTD: 18.54%
• 6M: 17.84%
• 1Y: 83.34%
• 3Y*: 46.58%
• 5Y*: 29.75%
• 10Y*: 14.73%

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

AFMC vs. EPU - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019
AFMC First Trust Active Factor Mid Cap ETF	16.92%	10.23%	19.06%	21.46%	-15.55%	25.75%	5.87%	1.97%
EPU iShares MSCI Peru ETF	18.54%	86.87%	21.73%	25.34%	2.05%	-11.81%	-4.31%	9.50%

Correlation

The correlation between AFMC and EPU is 0.49, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.49
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.46
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.49
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 4, 2019	0.49

AFMC vs. EPU - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	AFMC	EPU
Technology	20.9%	-
Industrials	20.7%	2.6%
Consumer Cyclical	13.4%	4.1%
Financial Services	12.8%	27.9%
Healthcare	9.3%	0.9%
Real Estate	6.7%	3.0%
Energy	5.4%	-
Basic Materials	5.3%	54.2%
Consumer Defensive	2.8%	3.0%
Communication Services	1.6%	1.5%
Utilities	1.1%	2.8%

Return for Risk

AFMC vs. EPU — Risk / Return Rank

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

AFMC

AFMC Risk / Return Rank: 64
AFMC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 60
AFMC Sortino Ratio Rank: 62
AFMC Omega Ratio Rank: 56
AFMC Calmar Ratio Rank: 72
AFMC Martin Ratio Rank: 71

EPU

EPU Risk / Return Rank: 76
EPU Sharpe Ratio Rank: 87
EPU Sortino Ratio Rank: 73
EPU Omega Ratio Rank: 75
EPU Calmar Ratio Rank: 80
EPU Martin Ratio Rank: 66

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.

AFMC vs. EPU - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for First Trust Active Factor Mid Cap ETF (AFMC) and iShares MSCI Peru ETF (EPU). 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.

	AFMC	EPU	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.85	2.68	-0.83
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.67	3.07	-0.40
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.32	1.42	-0.10
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.42	4.02	-0.59
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	12.33	11.51	+0.82

AFMC vs. EPU - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current AFMC Sharpe Ratio is 1.85, which is lower than the EPU Sharpe Ratio of 2.68. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of AFMC and EPU, 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

AFMC vs. EPU - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum AFMC drawdown since its inception was -42.14%, smaller than the maximum EPU drawdown of -60.62%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for AFMC and EPU.

Drawdown Indicators

	AFMC	EPU	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-42.14%	-60.62%	+18.48%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-8.20%	-20.85%	+12.65%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-21.99%	-20.85%	-1.14%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-25.40%	-35.59%	+10.19%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-50.97%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.20%	-8.61%	+7.41%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-7.56%	-18.79%	+11.23%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.27%	7.27%	-5.00%

Volatility

AFMC vs. EPU - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for First Trust Active Factor Mid Cap ETF (AFMC) is 4.69%, while iShares MSCI Peru ETF (EPU) has a volatility of 12.75%. This indicates that AFMC experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than EPU based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	AFMC	EPU	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.69%	12.75%	-8.06%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	11.34%	27.23%	-15.89%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	15.23%	31.33%	-16.10%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	18.96%	25.12%	-6.16%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	22.89%	23.66%	-0.77%

AFMC vs. EPU - Expense Ratio Comparison

AFMC has a 0.65% expense ratio, which is higher than EPU's 0.59% expense ratio.

Dividends

AFMC vs. EPU - Dividend Comparison

AFMC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.77%, less than EPU's 2.02% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
AFMC First Trust Active Factor Mid Cap ETF	0.77%	0.96%	0.64%	0.87%	1.42%	0.84%	1.05%	0.29%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
EPU iShares MSCI Peru ETF	2.02%	1.63%	5.78%	4.17%	5.56%	3.13%	1.91%	2.67%	1.53%	3.30%	0.85%	1.90%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both AFMC and EPU in my portfolio?

AFMC and EPU have a correlation of 0.49, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, AFMC or EPU?

EPU has higher volatility (12.75%) compared to AFMC (4.69%). In terms of maximum drawdown, AFMC dropped -42.14% vs EPU's -60.62%.

Which ETF is better, AFMC or EPU?

On 5-year performance, EPU leads with 29.75% vs 10.79% for AFMC. On fees, EPU is cheaper at 0.59% per year. On volatility, AFMC has been the lower-risk option at 4.69%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, AFMC or EPU?

Over the 5-year period, EPU has performed better with a 29.75% return vs 10.79%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, AFMC or EPU?

EPU is cheaper with a 0.59% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for AFMC.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, AFMC or EPU?

EPU has the higher dividend yield at 2.02%, compared with 0.77% for AFMC.

What is the main difference between AFMC and EPU?

They also come from different issuers: First Trust and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.65% for AFMC and 0.59% for EPU.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

EPU currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.67 vs 1.85), 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.