MFUS vs. RWL

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

MFUS (PIMCO RAFI Dynamic Multi-Factor U.S. Equity ETF) and RWL (Invesco S&P 500 Revenue ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - MFUS is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund tracking the RAFI Dynamic Multi-Factor U.S. Index​, while RWL is a S&P 500 fund tracking the S&P 500 Revenue-Weighted Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, MFUS returned 13.08%/yr vs 13.37%/yr for RWL. Their correlation of 0.91 suggests significant overlap in exposure. MFUS charges 0.30%/yr vs 0.39%/yr for RWL.

Performance

MFUS vs. RWL - 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 Invesco S&P 500 Revenue ETF (RWL). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, MFUS achieves a 17.10% return, which is significantly higher than RWL's 11.76% return.

MFUS

• 1D: -1.02%
• 1M: 2.42%
• YTD: 17.10%
• 6M: 16.30%
• 1Y: 27.79%
• 3Y*: 21.88%
• 5Y*: 13.08%
• 10Y*: —

RWL

• 1D: 0.13%
• 1M: 0.91%
• YTD: 11.76%
• 6M: 11.32%
• 1Y: 26.17%
• 3Y*: 19.58%
• 5Y*: 13.37%
• 10Y*: 14.32%

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

MFUS vs. RWL - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
MFUS PIMCO RAFI Dynamic Multi-Factor U.S. Equity ETF	17.10%	16.02%	20.17%	12.19%	-5.82%	24.10%	10.64%	26.17%	-7.30%	11.20%
RWL Invesco S&P 500 Revenue ETF	11.76%	18.65%	16.45%	17.43%	-6.00%	30.29%	9.14%	27.83%	-7.74%	11.53%

Correlation

The correlation between MFUS and RWL is 0.86, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.86
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.89
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.92
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 6, 2017	0.91

The correlation between MFUS and RWL has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.86 to 0.92 - a consistent structural relationship.

MFUS vs. RWL - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	MFUS	RWL
Technology	24.7%	16.3%
Healthcare	13.4%	19.4%
Industrials	12.2%	8.3%
Financial Services	12.0%	14.8%
Consumer Cyclical	10.5%	12.6%
Consumer Defensive	9.7%	10.2%
Energy	6.4%	6.1%
Communication Services	5.1%	7.2%
Basic Materials	2.8%	2.0%
Real Estate	1.7%	0.9%
Utilities	1.6%	2.2%

Return for Risk

MFUS vs. RWL — 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: 85
MFUS Omega Ratio Rank: 81
MFUS Calmar Ratio Rank: 85
MFUS Martin Ratio Rank: 87

RWL

RWL Risk / Return Rank: 83
RWL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 84
RWL Sortino Ratio Rank: 85
RWL Omega Ratio Rank: 81
RWL Calmar Ratio Rank: 80
RWL Martin Ratio Rank: 84

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. RWL - 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 Invesco S&P 500 Revenue ETF (RWL). 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	RWL	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.49	2.58	-0.09
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.53	3.58	-0.04
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.45	1.46	-0.01
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.37	3.96	+0.41
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	17.76	16.57	+1.18

MFUS vs. RWL - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MFUS Sharpe Ratio is 2.49, which is comparable to the RWL Sharpe Ratio of 2.58. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MFUS and RWL, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

MFUS vs. RWL - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MFUS drawdown since its inception was -35.21%, smaller than the maximum RWL drawdown of -54.83%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MFUS and RWL.

Drawdown Indicators

	MFUS	RWL	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-35.21%	-54.83%	+19.62%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-6.39%	-6.64%	+0.25%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-15.39%	-14.39%	-1.00%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-18.22%	-17.49%	-0.73%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-36.04%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.05%	-1.53%	+0.48%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.98%	-6.43%	+2.45%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.57%	1.58%	-0.01%

Volatility

MFUS vs. RWL - Volatility Comparison

PIMCO RAFI Dynamic Multi-Factor U.S. Equity ETF (MFUS) has a higher volatility of 4.27% compared to Invesco S&P 500 Revenue ETF (RWL) at 3.16%. This indicates that MFUS's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than RWL based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	MFUS	RWL	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.27%	3.16%	+1.11%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	8.91%	7.43%	+1.48%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	11.25%	10.20%	+1.05%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	15.09%	14.51%	+0.58%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	17.35%	16.84%	+0.51%

MFUS vs. RWL - Expense Ratio Comparison

MFUS has a 0.30% expense ratio, which is lower than RWL's 0.39% expense ratio.

Dividends

MFUS vs. RWL - Dividend Comparison

MFUS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.35%, more than RWL's 1.27% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
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%	0.00%	0.00%
RWL Invesco S&P 500 Revenue ETF	1.27%	1.35%	1.43%	1.60%	1.62%	1.35%	1.75%	1.87%	1.99%	1.60%	1.71%	1.97%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both MFUS and RWL in my portfolio?

MFUS and RWL have a correlation of 0.86, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, MFUS or RWL?

MFUS has higher volatility (4.27%) compared to RWL (3.16%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MFUS dropped -35.21% vs RWL's -54.83%.

Which ETF is better, MFUS or RWL?

On 5-year performance, RWL leads with 13.37% vs 13.08% for MFUS. On fees, MFUS is cheaper at 0.30% per year. On volatility, RWL has been the lower-risk option at 3.16%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, MFUS or RWL?

Over the 5-year period, RWL has performed better with a 13.37% return vs 13.08%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, MFUS or RWL?

MFUS is cheaper with a 0.30% expense ratio, compared with 0.39% for RWL.

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

MFUS has the higher dividend yield at 1.35%, compared with 1.27% for RWL.

What is the main difference between MFUS and RWL?

MFUS is categorized as Large Cap Growth Equities, while RWL is S&P 500. MFUS tracks RAFI Dynamic Multi-Factor U.S. Index​, while RWL tracks S&P 500 Revenue-Weighted Index. They also come from different issuers: PIMCO and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.30% for MFUS and 0.39% for RWL.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

RWL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.58 vs 2.49), 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.