MFUS vs. GRW

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

MFUS (PIMCO RAFI Dynamic Multi-Factor U.S. Equity ETF) and GRW (TCW Durable Growth ETF) are both Large Cap Growth Equities funds. MFUS is passively managed, while GRW is actively managed. At a correlation of -0.70, they often move in opposite directions. MFUS charges 0.30%/yr vs 0.75%/yr for GRW.

Performance

MFUS vs. GRW - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in PIMCO RAFI Dynamic Multi-Factor U.S. Equity ETF (MFUS) and TCW Durable Growth ETF (GRW). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

MFUS

• 1D: 0.19%
• 1M: 4.47%
• YTD: 16.59%
• 6M: 16.69%
• 1Y: 28.65%
• 3Y*: 22.52%
• 5Y*: 12.86%
• 10Y*: —

GRW

• 1D: 0.18%
• 1M: —
• YTD: —
• 6M: —
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

MFUS vs. GRW - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)
MFUS PIMCO RAFI Dynamic Multi-Factor U.S. Equity ETF	0.99%
GRW TCW Durable Growth ETF	1.46%

Correlation

The correlation between MFUS and GRW is -0.70, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.

	Correlation
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 29, 2026	-0.70

MFUS vs. GRW - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	MFUS	GRW
Technology	21.8%	26.6%
Healthcare	13.5%	4.1%
Industrials	12.6%	38.1%
Financial Services	12.6%	9.8%
Consumer Cyclical	10.6%	8.3%
Consumer Defensive	10.3%	-
Energy	7.0%	-
Communication Services	5.3%	9.1%
Basic Materials	2.8%	4.0%
Real Estate	1.8%	-
Utilities	1.7%	-

Return for Risk

MFUS vs. GRW — Risk / Return Rank

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

MFUS

MFUS Risk / Return Rank: 84
MFUS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 83
MFUS Sortino Ratio Rank: 86
MFUS Omega Ratio Rank: 81
MFUS Calmar Ratio Rank: 84
MFUS Martin Ratio Rank: 87

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.

MFUS vs. GRW - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for PIMCO RAFI Dynamic Multi-Factor U.S. Equity ETF (MFUS) and TCW Durable Growth ETF (GRW). 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.

	MFUS	GRW	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.69	—	—
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.85	—	—
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.48	—	—
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.51	—	—
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	18.52	—	—
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	MFUS	GRW	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.69	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.86	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.79	13.58	-12.79

Drawdowns

MFUS vs. GRW - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MFUS drawdown since its inception was -35.21%, which is greater than GRW's maximum drawdown of -0.45%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MFUS and GRW.

Drawdown Indicators

	MFUS	GRW	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-35.21%	-0.45%	-34.76%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-6.39%	—	—
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-15.39%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-18.22%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	-0.27%	+0.27%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.99%	-0.17%	-3.82%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.55%	—	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	MFUS	GRW	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.97%	—	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	8.22%	—	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	10.71%	8.89%	+1.82%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	15.03%	8.89%	+6.14%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	17.35%	8.89%	+8.46%

MFUS vs. GRW - Expense Ratio Comparison

MFUS has a 0.30% expense ratio, which is lower than GRW's 0.75% expense ratio.

Dividends

MFUS vs. GRW - Dividend Comparison

MFUS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.35%, while GRW has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
GRW TCW Durable 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	1.35%	1.54%	1.45%	1.96%	2.07%	1.35%	1.72%	1.89%	1.69%	1.01%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both MFUS and GRW in my portfolio?

MFUS and GRW have a correlation of -0.70, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, MFUS or GRW?

On fees, MFUS is cheaper at 0.30% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, MFUS or GRW?

MFUS is cheaper with a 0.30% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for GRW.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, MFUS or GRW?

MFUS has the higher dividend yield at 1.35%, compared with 0.00% for GRW.

What is the main difference between MFUS and GRW?

They also come from different issuers: PIMCO and TCW. Their fees differ too: 0.30% for MFUS and 0.75% for GRW.