PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
FCOM vs. MFUS
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

FCOM vs. MFUS - Performance Comparison

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

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FCOM achieves a -1.60% return, which is significantly lower than MFUS's 16.37% return.


FCOM

1D
-0.87%
1M
-2.85%
YTD
-1.60%
6M
0.27%
1Y
20.03%
3Y*
23.77%
5Y*
7.42%
10Y*
11.99%

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)

FCOM vs. MFUS - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
FCOM
Fidelity MSCI Communication Services Index ETF
-1.60%26.06%33.05%44.65%-38.97%13.88%28.33%26.69%-5.33%6.18%
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 FCOM and MFUS is 0.52, 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

0.52

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.62

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.68

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 7, 2017

0.69

The correlation between FCOM and MFUS shifts across timeframes, from 0.52 (1 year) to 0.69 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

FCOM vs. MFUS - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
FCOM
MFUS

Communication Services

98.5%
5.3%

Technology

1.2%
21.8%

Consumer Cyclical

0.3%
10.6%

Real Estate

0.1%
1.8%

Basic Materials

-

2.8%

Consumer Defensive

-

10.3%

Energy

-

7.0%

Financial Services

-

12.6%

Healthcare

-

13.5%

Industrials

-

12.6%

Utilities

-

1.7%

Communication Services

FCOM
98.5%
MFUS
5.3%

Technology

FCOM
1.2%
MFUS
21.8%

Consumer Cyclical

FCOM
0.3%
MFUS
10.6%

Real Estate

FCOM
0.1%
MFUS
1.8%

Basic Materials

FCOM

-

MFUS
2.8%

Consumer Defensive

FCOM

-

MFUS
10.3%

Energy

FCOM

-

MFUS
7.0%

Financial Services

FCOM

-

MFUS
12.6%

Healthcare

FCOM

-

MFUS
13.5%

Industrials

FCOM

-

MFUS
12.6%

Utilities

FCOM

-

MFUS
1.7%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.


Return for Risk

FCOM vs. MFUS — Risk / Return Rank

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

FCOM
FCOM Risk / Return Rank: 3434
Overall Rank
FCOM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3636
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FCOM Sortino Ratio Rank: 3737
Sortino Ratio Rank
FCOM Omega Ratio Rank: 3434
Omega Ratio Rank
FCOM Calmar Ratio Rank: 3030
Calmar Ratio Rank
FCOM Martin Ratio Rank: 3636
Martin Ratio Rank

MFUS
MFUS Risk / Return Rank: 8282
Overall Rank
MFUS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8080
Sharpe Ratio Rank
MFUS Sortino Ratio Rank: 8383
Sortino Ratio Rank
MFUS Omega Ratio Rank: 7878
Omega Ratio Rank
MFUS Calmar Ratio Rank: 8383
Calmar Ratio Rank
MFUS Martin Ratio Rank: 8686
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

FCOM vs. MFUS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Fidelity MSCI Communication Services Index ETF (FCOM) 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.


FCOMMFUSDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-1.32

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-1.80

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.23

1.47

-0.24

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.49

4.41

-2.92

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

5.67

18.13

-12.45

FCOM vs. MFUS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FCOM Sharpe Ratio is 1.31, which is lower than the MFUS Sharpe Ratio of 2.63. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FCOM 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.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


FCOMMFUSDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.31

2.63

-1.32

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.35

0.86

-0.50

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.57

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.57

0.79

-0.22

Drawdowns

FCOM vs. MFUS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FCOM drawdown since its inception was -46.76%, which is greater than MFUS's maximum drawdown of -35.21%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FCOM and MFUS.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


FCOMMFUSDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-46.76%

-35.21%

-11.55%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-13.48%

-6.39%

-7.09%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-21.16%

-15.39%

-5.77%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-46.76%

-18.22%

-28.54%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-46.76%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-4.88%

0.00%

-4.88%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-8.66%

-4.00%

-4.66%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.54%

1.55%

+1.99%

Volatility

FCOM vs. MFUS - Volatility Comparison

Fidelity MSCI Communication Services Index ETF (FCOM) has a higher volatility of 4.24% compared to PIMCO RAFI Dynamic Multi-Factor U.S. Equity ETF (MFUS) at 3.19%. This indicates that FCOM'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.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


FCOMMFUSDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.24%

3.19%

+1.05%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

11.02%

8.22%

+2.80%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

15.38%

10.72%

+4.66%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

21.17%

15.03%

+6.14%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

20.96%

17.35%

+3.61%

FCOM vs. MFUS - Expense Ratio Comparison

FCOM has a 0.08% expense ratio, which is lower than MFUS's 0.30% expense ratio.


Dividends

FCOM vs. MFUS - Dividend Comparison

FCOM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.94%, less than MFUS's 1.36% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
FCOM
Fidelity MSCI Communication Services Index ETF
0.94%0.88%0.87%0.77%1.04%0.90%0.68%0.86%2.78%11.70%2.27%2.92%
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%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


FCOM and MFUS have a correlation of 0.52, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

FCOM has higher volatility (4.24%) compared to MFUS (3.19%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FCOM dropped -46.76% vs MFUS's -35.21%.

On 5-year performance, MFUS leads with 12.82% vs 7.42% for FCOM. On fees, FCOM is cheaper at 0.08% 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.

Over the 5-year period, MFUS has performed better with a 12.82% return vs 7.42%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

FCOM is cheaper with a 0.08% expense ratio, compared with 0.30% for MFUS.

MFUS has the higher dividend yield at 1.36%, compared with 0.94% for FCOM.

FCOM tracks MSCI USA IMI Telecommunication Services 25/50 Index, while MFUS tracks RAFI Dynamic Multi-Factor U.S. Index​. They also come from different issuers: Fidelity and PIMCO. Their fees differ too: 0.08% for FCOM and 0.30% for MFUS.

MFUS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.63 vs 1.31), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for FCOM and MFUS

Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.

Open Portfolio Optimizer