FFOG vs. MFUS
FFOG (Franklin Focused Growth ETF) and MFUS (PIMCO RAFI Dynamic Multi-Factor U.S. Equity ETF) are both Large Cap Growth Equities funds. FFOG is actively managed, while MFUS is passively managed. Over the past year, FFOG returned 23.96% vs 28.04% for MFUS. A 0.62 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. FFOG charges 0.55%/yr vs 0.30%/yr for MFUS.
Performance
FFOG vs. MFUS - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, FFOG achieves a 10.66% return, which is significantly lower than MFUS's 16.37% return.
FFOG
- 1D
- -0.97%
- 1M
- 5.98%
- YTD
- 10.66%
- 6M
- 9.70%
- 1Y
- 23.96%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
MFUS
- 1D
- 0.03%
- 1M
- 5.72%
- YTD
- 16.37%
- 6M
- 16.58%
- 1Y
- 28.04%
- 3Y*
- 22.25%
- 5Y*
- 12.82%
- 10Y*
- —
FFOG vs. MFUS - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
FFOG Franklin Focused Growth ETF | 10.66% | 17.09% | 38.20% | 12.41% |
MFUS PIMCO RAFI Dynamic Multi-Factor U.S. Equity ETF | 16.37% | 16.02% | 20.17% | 9.88% |
Correlation
The correlation between FFOG and MFUS is 0.55, 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 | 0.55 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 7, 2023 | 0.62 |
The correlation between FFOG and MFUS has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.55 to 0.62 - a consistent structural relationship.
FFOG vs. MFUS - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
FFOG
MFUS
Technology
Consumer Cyclical
Communication Services
Healthcare
Industrials
Financial Services
Utilities
Energy
Basic Materials
-
Consumer Defensive
-
Real Estate
-
Technology
FFOG
MFUS
Consumer Cyclical
FFOG
MFUS
Communication Services
FFOG
MFUS
Healthcare
FFOG
MFUS
Industrials
FFOG
MFUS
Financial Services
FFOG
MFUS
Utilities
FFOG
MFUS
Energy
FFOG
MFUS
Basic Materials
FFOG
-
MFUS
Consumer Defensive
FFOG
-
MFUS
Real Estate
FFOG
-
MFUS
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
FFOG vs. MFUS — Risk / Return Rank
FFOG
MFUS
FFOG vs. MFUS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Franklin Focused Growth ETF (FFOG) 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.
| FFOG | MFUS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -1.43 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -2.10 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.21 | 1.47 | -0.26 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.10 | 4.41 | -3.31 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 3.25 | 18.13 | -14.87 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| FFOG | MFUS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.20 | 2.63 | -1.43 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | — | 0.86 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 1.32 | 0.79 | +0.54 |
Drawdowns
FFOG vs. MFUS - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum FFOG drawdown since its inception was -25.38%, smaller than the maximum MFUS drawdown of -35.21%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FFOG and MFUS.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| FFOG | MFUS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -25.38% | -35.21% | +9.83% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -21.90% | -6.39% | -15.51% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -15.39% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -18.22% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.97% | 0.00% | -0.97% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -4.59% | -4.00% | -0.59% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 7.39% | 1.55% | +5.84% |
Volatility
FFOG vs. MFUS - Volatility Comparison
Franklin Focused Growth ETF (FFOG) has a higher volatility of 4.75% compared to PIMCO RAFI Dynamic Multi-Factor U.S. Equity ETF (MFUS) at 3.19%. This indicates that FFOG'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
| FFOG | MFUS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 4.75% | 3.19% | +1.56% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 15.44% | 8.22% | +7.22% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 20.03% | 10.72% | +9.31% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 23.79% | 15.03% | +8.76% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 23.79% | 17.35% | +6.44% |
FFOG vs. MFUS - Expense Ratio Comparison
FFOG has a 0.55% expense ratio, which is higher than MFUS's 0.30% expense ratio.
Dividends
FFOG vs. MFUS - Dividend Comparison
FFOG has not paid dividends to shareholders, while MFUS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.36%.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FFOG Franklin Focused Growth ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 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
FFOG and MFUS have a correlation of 0.55, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
FFOG has higher volatility (4.75%) compared to MFUS (3.19%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FFOG dropped -25.38% vs MFUS's -35.21%.
On 1-year performance, MFUS leads with 28.04% vs 23.96% for FFOG. 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 1-year period, MFUS has performed better with a 28.04% return vs 23.96%. 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 0.55% for FFOG.
MFUS has the higher dividend yield at 1.36%, compared with 0.00% for FFOG.
They also come from different issuers: Franklin Templeton and PIMCO. Their fees differ too: 0.55% for FFOG and 0.30% for MFUS.
MFUS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.63 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.
Find the right allocation for FFOG 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