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

Performance

FFLG vs. MFUS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Fidelity Fundamental Large Cap Growth ETF (FFLG) 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

The year-to-date returns for both stocks are quite close, with FFLG having a 16.49% return and MFUS slightly lower at 16.37%.


FFLG

1D
-0.90%
1M
7.34%
YTD
16.49%
6M
16.21%
1Y
39.38%
3Y*
28.99%
5Y*
12.59%
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)

FFLG vs. MFUS - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024202320222021
FFLG
Fidelity Fundamental Large Cap Growth ETF
16.49%19.61%32.29%49.71%-37.86%1.72%
MFUS
PIMCO RAFI Dynamic Multi-Factor U.S. Equity ETF
16.37%16.02%20.17%12.19%-5.82%20.25%

Correlation

The correlation between FFLG and MFUS is 0.61, 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

0.61

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

0.69

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

0.71

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 5, 2021

0.71

The correlation between FFLG and MFUS shifts across timeframes, from 0.61 (1 year) to 0.71 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

FFLG vs. MFUS - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
FFLG
MFUS

Technology

51.7%
21.8%

Communication Services

15.1%
5.3%

Consumer Cyclical

11.3%
10.6%

Healthcare

6.4%
13.5%

Industrials

5.9%
12.6%

Financial Services

3.3%
12.6%

Utilities

1.4%
1.7%

Basic Materials

1.4%
2.8%

Real Estate

0.7%
1.8%

Consumer Defensive

0.6%
10.3%

Energy

0.3%
7.0%

Technology

FFLG
51.7%
MFUS
21.8%

Communication Services

FFLG
15.1%
MFUS
5.3%

Consumer Cyclical

FFLG
11.3%
MFUS
10.6%

Healthcare

FFLG
6.4%
MFUS
13.5%

Industrials

FFLG
5.9%
MFUS
12.6%

Financial Services

FFLG
3.3%
MFUS
12.6%

Utilities

FFLG
1.4%
MFUS
1.7%

Basic Materials

FFLG
1.4%
MFUS
2.8%

Real Estate

FFLG
0.7%
MFUS
1.8%

Consumer Defensive

FFLG
0.6%
MFUS
10.3%

Energy

FFLG
0.3%
MFUS
7.0%

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

FFLG vs. MFUS — Risk / Return Rank

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

FFLG
FFLG Risk / Return Rank: 6060
Overall Rank
FFLG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6464
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FFLG Sortino Ratio Rank: 5959
Sortino Ratio Rank
FFLG Omega Ratio Rank: 5959
Omega Ratio Rank
FFLG Calmar Ratio Rank: 5555
Calmar Ratio Rank
FFLG Martin Ratio Rank: 6060
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.

FFLG vs. MFUS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Fidelity Fundamental Large Cap Growth ETF (FFLG) 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.


FFLGMFUSDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.47

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.92

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.37

1.47

-0.10

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.78

4.41

-1.63

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

10.87

18.13

-7.25

FFLG vs. MFUS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FFLG Sharpe Ratio is 2.16, which is comparable to the MFUS Sharpe Ratio of 2.63. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FFLG 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


FFLGMFUSDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.16

2.63

-0.47

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.50

0.86

-0.36

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.44

0.79

-0.35

Drawdowns

FFLG vs. MFUS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FFLG drawdown since its inception was -44.52%, which is greater than MFUS's maximum drawdown of -35.21%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FFLG and MFUS.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


FFLGMFUSDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-44.52%

-35.21%

-9.31%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-14.23%

-6.39%

-7.84%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-26.72%

-15.39%

-11.33%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-44.52%

-18.22%

-26.30%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.90%

0.00%

-0.90%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-14.27%

-4.00%

-10.27%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.63%

1.55%

+2.08%

Volatility

FFLG vs. MFUS - Volatility Comparison

Fidelity Fundamental Large Cap Growth ETF (FFLG) has a higher volatility of 4.60% compared to PIMCO RAFI Dynamic Multi-Factor U.S. Equity ETF (MFUS) at 3.19%. This indicates that FFLG'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


FFLGMFUSDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.60%

3.19%

+1.41%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

14.11%

8.22%

+5.89%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

18.30%

10.72%

+7.58%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

25.34%

15.03%

+10.31%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

25.38%

17.35%

+8.03%

FFLG vs. MFUS - Expense Ratio Comparison

FFLG has a 0.38% expense ratio, which is higher than MFUS's 0.30% expense ratio.


Dividends

FFLG vs. MFUS - Dividend Comparison

FFLG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.13%, less than MFUS's 1.36% yield.


PositionTTM202520242023202220212020201920182017
FFLG
Fidelity Fundamental Large Cap Growth ETF
0.13%0.14%0.09%0.00%1.50%0.55%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
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


FFLG and MFUS have a correlation of 0.61, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

FFLG has higher volatility (4.60%) compared to MFUS (3.19%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FFLG dropped -44.52% vs MFUS's -35.21%.

On 5-year performance, MFUS leads with 12.82% vs 12.59% for FFLG. 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.

Over the 5-year period, MFUS has performed better with a 12.82% return vs 12.59%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

MFUS is cheaper with a 0.30% expense ratio, compared with 0.38% for FFLG.

MFUS has the higher dividend yield at 1.36%, compared with 0.13% for FFLG.

They also come from different issuers: Fidelity and PIMCO. Their fees differ too: 0.38% for FFLG and 0.30% for MFUS.

MFUS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.63 vs 2.16), 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 FFLG 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