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

Performance

FTGS vs. MFUS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in First Trust Growth Strength ETF (FTGS) 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, FTGS achieves a 5.22% return, which is significantly lower than MFUS's 16.37% return.


FTGS

1D
-0.75%
1M
3.43%
YTD
5.22%
6M
5.10%
1Y
12.55%
3Y*
18.88%
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*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

FTGS vs. MFUS - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)2025202420232022
FTGS
First Trust Growth Strength ETF
5.22%12.78%15.76%33.69%1.09%
MFUS
PIMCO RAFI Dynamic Multi-Factor U.S. Equity ETF
16.37%16.02%20.17%12.19%1.95%

Correlation

The correlation between FTGS and MFUS is 0.74, 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

0.74

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

0.82

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 27, 2022

0.83

The correlation between FTGS and MFUS has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.74 to 0.83 - a consistent structural relationship.

FTGS vs. MFUS - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
FTGS
MFUS

Technology

30.6%
21.8%

Healthcare

17.6%
13.5%

Financial Services

16.2%
12.6%

Consumer Cyclical

13.6%
10.6%

Industrials

12.3%
12.6%

Communication Services

5.7%
5.3%

Energy

4.8%
7.0%

Consumer Defensive

2.0%
10.3%

Basic Materials

1.9%
2.8%

Real Estate

-

1.8%

Utilities

-

1.7%

Technology

FTGS
30.6%
MFUS
21.8%

Healthcare

FTGS
17.6%
MFUS
13.5%

Financial Services

FTGS
16.2%
MFUS
12.6%

Consumer Cyclical

FTGS
13.6%
MFUS
10.6%

Industrials

FTGS
12.3%
MFUS
12.6%

Communication Services

FTGS
5.7%
MFUS
5.3%

Energy

FTGS
4.8%
MFUS
7.0%

Consumer Defensive

FTGS
2.0%
MFUS
10.3%

Basic Materials

FTGS
1.9%
MFUS
2.8%

Real Estate

FTGS

-

MFUS
1.8%

Utilities

FTGS

-

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

FTGS vs. MFUS — Risk / Return Rank

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

FTGS
FTGS Risk / Return Rank: 2727
Overall Rank
FTGS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2626
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FTGS Sortino Ratio Rank: 2626
Sortino Ratio Rank
FTGS Omega Ratio Rank: 2424
Omega Ratio Rank
FTGS Calmar Ratio Rank: 2727
Calmar Ratio Rank
FTGS Martin Ratio Rank: 3131
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.

FTGS vs. MFUS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for First Trust Growth Strength ETF (FTGS) 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.


FTGSMFUSDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-1.69

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-2.36

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.17

1.47

-0.31

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.33

4.41

-3.08

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

4.51

18.13

-13.62

FTGS vs. MFUS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FTGS Sharpe Ratio is 0.94, which is lower than the MFUS Sharpe Ratio of 2.63. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FTGS 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


FTGSMFUSDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.94

2.63

-1.69

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.86

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

1.10

0.79

+0.31

Drawdowns

FTGS vs. MFUS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FTGS drawdown since its inception was -19.99%, smaller than the maximum MFUS drawdown of -35.21%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FTGS and MFUS.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


FTGSMFUSDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-19.99%

-35.21%

+15.22%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-9.47%

-6.39%

-3.08%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-19.99%

-15.39%

-4.60%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-18.22%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.66%

0.00%

-1.66%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-2.75%

-4.00%

+1.25%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.79%

1.55%

+1.24%

Volatility

FTGS vs. MFUS - Volatility Comparison

First Trust Growth Strength ETF (FTGS) and PIMCO RAFI Dynamic Multi-Factor U.S. Equity ETF (MFUS) have volatilities of 3.33% and 3.19%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


FTGSMFUSDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.33%

3.19%

+0.14%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

10.27%

8.22%

+2.05%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

13.45%

10.72%

+2.73%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

17.15%

15.03%

+2.12%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

17.15%

17.35%

-0.20%

FTGS vs. MFUS - Expense Ratio Comparison

FTGS has a 0.60% expense ratio, which is higher than MFUS's 0.30% expense ratio.


Dividends

FTGS vs. MFUS - Dividend Comparison

FTGS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.09%, less than MFUS's 1.36% yield.


PositionTTM202520242023202220212020201920182017
FTGS
First Trust Growth Strength ETF
0.09%0.16%0.39%0.62%0.21%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


FTGS and MFUS have a correlation of 0.74, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

FTGS has higher volatility (3.33%) compared to MFUS (3.19%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FTGS dropped -19.99% vs MFUS's -35.21%.

On 3-year performance, MFUS leads with 22.25% vs 18.88% for FTGS. 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 3-year period, MFUS has performed better with a 22.25% return vs 18.88%. 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 0.60% for FTGS.

MFUS has the higher dividend yield at 1.36%, compared with 0.09% for FTGS.

FTGS tracks The Growth Strength Index - Benchmark TR Gross, while MFUS tracks RAFI Dynamic Multi-Factor U.S. Index​. They also come from different issuers: First Trust and PIMCO. Their fees differ too: 0.60% for FTGS and 0.30% for MFUS.

MFUS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.63 vs 0.94), 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 FTGS 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