MFEM vs. LTPZ
MFEM (PIMCO RAFI Dynamic Multi-Factor Emerging Markets Equity ETF) and LTPZ (PIMCO 15+ Year U.S. TIPS Index ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - MFEM is a Emerging Markets Equities fund tracking the RAFI Dynamic Multi-Factor Emerging Market Index, while LTPZ is a Inflation-Protected Bonds fund tracking the ICE BofA US Inflation-Linked Treasury (15+ Y). Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, MFEM returned 7.21%/yr vs -7.34%/yr for LTPZ. Their 0.05 correlation means their historical movements had little consistent relationship. MFEM charges 0.49%/yr vs 0.20%/yr for LTPZ.
Performance
MFEM vs. LTPZ - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, MFEM achieves a 16.47% return, which is significantly higher than LTPZ's -3.75% return.
MFEM
- 1D
- -0.21%
- 1M
- -2.90%
- 6M
- 6.30%
- YTD
- 16.47%
- 1Y
- 30.01%
- 3Y*
- 15.79%
- 5Y*
- 7.21%
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- 6.85%
LTPZ
- 1D
- -0.34%
- 1M
- -3.73%
- 6M
- -3.61%
- YTD
- -3.75%
- 1Y
- -2.50%
- 3Y*
- -1.54%
- 5Y*
- -7.34%
- 10Y*
- -0.06%
- ALL TIME*
- 2.79%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $11.36M | $8.24M | $7.63M | |
| $581.34K | $458.22K | $623.99K |
MFEM vs. LTPZ - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
MFEM PIMCO RAFI Dynamic Multi-Factor Emerging Markets Equity ETF | 16.47% | 25.33% | 4.73% | 15.14% | -19.50% | 10.77% | 11.33% | 15.26% | -14.64% | 4.86% |
LTPZ PIMCO 15+ Year U.S. TIPS Index ETF | -3.75% | 4.00% | -4.80% | 0.96% | -31.71% | 7.02% | 24.89% | 17.47% | -7.22% | 2.85% |
Correlation
The correlation between MFEM and LTPZ is 0.30, which is low. Their historical price movements had little consistent relationship.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most. | 0.30 |
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history. | 0.21 |
Correlation (5Y) Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period. | 0.15 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 6, 2017 | 0.05 |
Over the past year, MFEM and LTPZ have become more correlated (0.30) than their long-term average of 0.05, meaning their price movements have been converging.
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
MFEM vs. LTPZ — Risk / Return Rank
MFEM
LTPZ
MFEM vs. LTPZ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for PIMCO RAFI Dynamic Multi-Factor Emerging Markets Equity ETF (MFEM) and PIMCO 15+ Year U.S. TIPS Index ETF (LTPZ). 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.
Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.
| MFEM | LTPZ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +1.49 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +2.01 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.25 | 0.98 | +0.27 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.97 | -0.20 | +2.17 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 5.82 | -0.42 | +6.23 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
MFEM vs. LTPZ - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum MFEM drawdown since its inception was -43.32%, which is greater than LTPZ's maximum drawdown of -40.99%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MFEM and LTPZ.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| MFEM | LTPZ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -43.32% | -40.99% | -2.33% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -15.05% | -8.09% | -6.96% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -19.22% | -12.64% | -6.58% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -30.78% | -40.99% | +10.21% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -40.99% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -12.43% | -35.53% | +23.10% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -11.43% | -12.60% | +1.17% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 5.08% | 3.86% | +1.22% |
Volatility
MFEM vs. LTPZ - Volatility Comparison
PIMCO RAFI Dynamic Multi-Factor Emerging Markets Equity ETF (MFEM) has a higher volatility of 7.50% compared to PIMCO 15+ Year U.S. TIPS Index ETF (LTPZ) at 2.05%. This indicates that MFEM's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than LTPZ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| MFEM | LTPZ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 7.50% | 2.05% | +5.45% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 20.84% | 6.79% | +14.05% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 22.65% | 9.03% | +13.62% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 17.42% | 15.85% | +1.57% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 19.70% | 15.03% | +4.67% |
MFEM vs. LTPZ - Expense Ratio Comparison
MFEM has a 0.49% expense ratio, which is higher than LTPZ's 0.20% expense ratio.
Dividends
MFEM vs. LTPZ - Dividend Comparison
MFEM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.37%, less than LTPZ's 6.35% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
LTPZ PIMCO 15+ Year U.S. TIPS Index ETF | 6.00% | 4.64% | 3.71% | 3.71% | 8.38% | 3.56% | 1.42% | 1.74% | 3.05% | 2.25% | 2.32% | 0.71% |
MFEM PIMCO RAFI Dynamic Multi-Factor Emerging Markets Equity ETF | 2.37% | 2.77% | 5.89% | 4.01% | 7.01% | 29.96% | 1.70% | 2.37% | 1.18% | 0.21% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
MFEM and LTPZ have a correlation of 0.30, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
MFEM has higher volatility (7.50%) compared to LTPZ (2.05%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MFEM dropped -43.32% vs LTPZ's -40.99%.
On 5-year performance, MFEM leads with 7.21% vs -7.34% for LTPZ. On fees, LTPZ is cheaper at 0.20% per year. On volatility, LTPZ has been the lower-risk option at 2.05%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 5-year period, MFEM has performed better with a 7.21% return vs -7.34%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
LTPZ is cheaper with a 0.20% expense ratio, compared with 0.49% for MFEM.
LTPZ has the higher dividend yield at 6.00%, compared with 2.37% for MFEM.
MFEM is categorized as Emerging Markets Equities, while LTPZ is Inflation-Protected Bonds. MFEM tracks RAFI Dynamic Multi-Factor Emerging Market Index, while LTPZ tracks ICE BofA US Inflation-Linked Treasury (15+ Y). Their fees differ too: 0.49% for MFEM and 0.20% for LTPZ.
MFEM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.31 vs -0.18), 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 MFEM and LTPZ
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