MFUS vs. GRW
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. A 0.55 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. MFUS charges 0.30%/yr vs 0.75%/yr for GRW.
Performance
MFUS vs. GRW - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
MFUS
- 1D
- -0.03%
- 1M
- -1.47%
- 6M
- 11.55%
- YTD
- 15.92%
- 1Y
- 23.97%
- 3Y*
- 19.89%
- 5Y*
- 13.30%
- 10Y*
- —
GRW
- 1D
- -0.86%
- 1M
- -1.00%
- 6M
- —
- YTD
- —
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
MFUS vs. GRW - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | |
|---|---|
MFUS PIMCO RAFI Dynamic Multi-Factor U.S. Equity ETF | 0.79% |
GRW TCW Durable Growth ETF | 2.09% |
Correlation
The correlation between MFUS and GRW 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 (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 28, 2026 | 0.55 |
MFUS vs. GRW - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
MFUS
GRW
Technology
Healthcare
Industrials
Financial Services
Consumer Cyclical
Consumer Defensive
-
Energy
-
Communication Services
Basic Materials
Real Estate
-
Utilities
-
Technology
MFUS
GRW
Healthcare
MFUS
GRW
Industrials
MFUS
GRW
Financial Services
MFUS
GRW
Consumer Cyclical
MFUS
GRW
Consumer Defensive
MFUS
GRW
-
Energy
MFUS
GRW
-
Communication Services
MFUS
GRW
Basic Materials
MFUS
GRW
Real Estate
MFUS
GRW
-
Utilities
MFUS
GRW
-
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
MFUS vs. GRW — Risk / Return Rank
MFUS
GRW
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
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.
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.
| MFUS | GRW | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.38 | — | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.77 | — | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 14.88 | — | — |
Loading charts...
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 -3.83%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MFUS and GRW.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| MFUS | GRW | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -35.21% | -3.83% | -31.38% |
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 DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -2.72% | -2.69% | -0.03% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -3.96% | -1.18% | -2.78% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.62% | — | — |
Volatility
MFUS vs. GRW - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| MFUS | GRW | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 3.16% | — | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 9.07% | — | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 11.26% | 16.46% | -5.20% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 15.06% | 16.46% | -1.40% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 17.31% | 16.46% | +0.85% |
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 1.38%, 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 | 1.38% | 1.54% | 1.45% | 1.96% | 2.07% | 1.35% | 1.72% | 1.89% | 1.69% | 1.01% |
Frequently Asked Questions
MFUS and GRW 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.
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.
MFUS is cheaper with a 0.30% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for GRW.
MFUS has the higher dividend yield at 1.38%, compared with 0.00% for GRW.
They also come from different issuers: PIMCO and TCW. Their fees differ too: 0.30% for MFUS and 0.75% for GRW.
Find the right allocation for MFUS and GRW
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