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

Performance

IWL vs. MFUS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares Russell Top 200 ETF (IWL) 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, IWL achieves a 10.03% return, which is significantly lower than MFUS's 16.37% return.


IWL

1D
-0.83%
1M
5.18%
YTD
10.03%
6M
10.03%
1Y
28.50%
3Y*
23.42%
5Y*
14.59%
10Y*
16.38%

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)

IWL vs. MFUS - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
IWL
iShares Russell Top 200 ETF
10.03%19.09%27.12%29.77%-19.89%27.79%22.10%31.42%-3.30%9.15%
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 IWL and MFUS is 0.75, 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

0.75

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

0.81

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

0.83

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

0.85

The correlation between IWL and MFUS has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.75 to 0.85 - a consistent structural relationship.

IWL vs. MFUS - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
IWL
MFUS

Technology

40.9%
21.8%

Communication Services

12.2%
5.3%

Financial Services

11.3%
12.6%

Consumer Cyclical

9.6%
10.6%

Healthcare

8.5%
13.5%

Industrials

6.1%
12.6%

Consumer Defensive

4.7%
10.3%

Energy

2.5%
7.0%

Utilities

1.7%
1.7%

Basic Materials

1.4%
2.8%

Real Estate

1.0%
1.8%

Technology

IWL
40.9%
MFUS
21.8%

Communication Services

IWL
12.2%
MFUS
5.3%

Financial Services

IWL
11.3%
MFUS
12.6%

Consumer Cyclical

IWL
9.6%
MFUS
10.6%

Healthcare

IWL
8.5%
MFUS
13.5%

Industrials

IWL
6.1%
MFUS
12.6%

Consumer Defensive

IWL
4.7%
MFUS
10.3%

Energy

IWL
2.5%
MFUS
7.0%

Utilities

IWL
1.7%
MFUS
1.7%

Basic Materials

IWL
1.4%
MFUS
2.8%

Real Estate

IWL
1.0%
MFUS
1.8%

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

IWL vs. MFUS — Risk / Return Rank

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

IWL
IWL Risk / Return Rank: 6767
Overall Rank
IWL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7070
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IWL Sortino Ratio Rank: 6868
Sortino Ratio Rank
IWL Omega Ratio Rank: 6969
Omega Ratio Rank
IWL Calmar Ratio Rank: 5858
Calmar Ratio Rank
IWL Martin Ratio Rank: 6969
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.

IWL vs. MFUS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Russell Top 200 ETF (IWL) 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.


IWLMFUSDifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

2.35

2.63

-0.28

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

3.20

3.77

-0.58

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

1.42

1.47

-0.05

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

2.91

4.41

-1.50

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

12.92

18.13

-5.20

IWL vs. MFUS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IWL Sharpe Ratio is 2.35, which is comparable to the MFUS Sharpe Ratio of 2.63. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IWL 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


IWLMFUSDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.35

2.63

-0.28

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.85

0.86

0.00

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.91

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.88

0.79

+0.09

Drawdowns

IWL vs. MFUS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IWL drawdown since its inception was -32.71%, smaller than the maximum MFUS drawdown of -35.21%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IWL and MFUS.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


IWLMFUSDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-32.71%

-35.21%

+2.50%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-9.83%

-6.39%

-3.44%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-19.15%

-15.39%

-3.76%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-25.65%

-18.22%

-7.43%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-32.71%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.83%

0.00%

-0.83%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-3.88%

-4.00%

+0.12%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.21%

1.55%

+0.66%

Volatility

IWL vs. MFUS - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares Russell Top 200 ETF (IWL) is 2.98%, while PIMCO RAFI Dynamic Multi-Factor U.S. Equity ETF (MFUS) has a volatility of 3.19%. This indicates that IWL experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than MFUS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


IWLMFUSDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

2.98%

3.19%

-0.21%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

9.15%

8.22%

+0.93%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

12.19%

10.72%

+1.47%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

17.17%

15.03%

+2.14%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

18.08%

17.35%

+0.73%

IWL vs. MFUS - Expense Ratio Comparison

IWL has a 0.15% expense ratio, which is lower than MFUS's 0.30% expense ratio.


Dividends

IWL vs. MFUS - Dividend Comparison

IWL's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.82%, less than MFUS's 1.36% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
IWL
iShares Russell Top 200 ETF
0.82%0.90%1.04%1.30%1.54%1.12%1.30%1.96%1.93%1.69%1.96%2.14%
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


IWL and MFUS have a correlation of 0.75, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

MFUS has higher volatility (3.19%) compared to IWL (2.98%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IWL dropped -32.71% vs MFUS's -35.21%.

On 5-year performance, IWL leads with 14.59% vs 12.82% for MFUS. On fees, IWL is cheaper at 0.15% per year. On volatility, IWL has been the lower-risk option at 2.98%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 5-year period, IWL has performed better with a 14.59% return vs 12.82%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

IWL is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.30% for MFUS.

MFUS has the higher dividend yield at 1.36%, compared with 0.82% for IWL.

IWL tracks Russell Top 200 Index, while MFUS tracks RAFI Dynamic Multi-Factor U.S. Index​. They also come from different issuers: iShares and PIMCO. Their fees differ too: 0.15% for IWL and 0.30% for MFUS.

MFUS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.63 vs 2.35), 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 IWL 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