RECS vs. MFUS

Last updated Aug 4, 2026

RECS (Columbia Research Enhanced Core ETF) and MFUS (PIMCO RAFI Dynamic Multi-Factor U.S. Equity ETF) are both Large Cap Growth Equities funds - RECS tracks the Beta Advantage Research Enhanced U.S. Equity Index while MFUS tracks the RAFI Dynamic Multi-Factor U.S. Index​. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, RECS returned 13.31%/yr vs 13.05%/yr for MFUS. Their 0.75 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. RECS charges 0.15%/yr vs 0.30%/yr for MFUS.

Performance

RECS vs. MFUS - Performance Comparison

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, RECS achieves a 8.13% return, which is significantly lower than MFUS's 16.56% return.

RECS

• 1D: 0.91%
• 1M: 1.54%
• 6M: 6.59%
• YTD: 8.13%
• 1Y: 20.01%
• 3Y*: 20.51%
• 5Y*: 13.31%
• 10Y*: 10.05%
• ALL TIME*: 3.91%

MFUS

• 1D: 0.44%
• 1M: -0.34%
• 6M: 10.78%
• YTD: 16.56%
• 1Y: 25.93%
• 3Y*: 19.97%
• 5Y*: 13.05%
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 13.41%

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
MFUS PIMCO RAFI Dynamic Multi-Factor U.S. Equity ETF	$1.69M	$1.08M	$961.02K
RECS Columbia Research Enhanced Core ETF	$24.00M	$20.19M	$19.93M

RECS vs. MFUS - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
RECS Columbia Research Enhanced Core ETF	8.13%	19.30%	26.27%	23.19%	-14.39%	32.73%	15.35%	-0.93%	0.00%	0.00%
MFUS PIMCO RAFI Dynamic Multi-Factor U.S. Equity ETF	16.56%	16.02%	20.17%	12.19%	-5.82%	24.10%	10.64%	26.17%	-7.30%	11.20%

Correlation

The correlation between RECS and MFUS is 0.74, which is moderate. They have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently, sharing some price drivers without tracking each other closely.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.74
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history.	0.83
Correlation (5Y) Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period.	0.86
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 6, 2017	0.75

The correlation between RECS and MFUS shifts across timeframes, from 0.74 (1 year) to 0.86 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

RECS vs. MFUS - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	RECS	MFUS
Technology	36.6%	25.8%
Financial Services	11.9%	11.3%
Communication Services	10.2%	4.6%
Consumer Cyclical	9.4%	9.3%
Healthcare	9.1%	14.7%
Industrials	8.9%	12.5%
Consumer Defensive	4.5%	9.3%
Energy	3.0%	6.6%
Real Estate	2.2%	2.0%
Utilities	2.2%	1.3%
Basic Materials	1.9%	2.5%

Return for Risk

RECS vs. MFUS — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

RECS

RECS Risk / Return Rank: 68
RECS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 69
RECS Sortino Ratio Rank: 68
RECS Omega Ratio Rank: 66
RECS Calmar Ratio Rank: 63
RECS Martin Ratio Rank: 73

MFUS

MFUS Risk / Return Rank: 90
MFUS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 90
MFUS Sortino Ratio Rank: 90
MFUS Omega Ratio Rank: 89
MFUS Calmar Ratio Rank: 91
MFUS Martin Ratio Rank: 91

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

RECS vs. MFUS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Columbia Research Enhanced Core ETF (RECS) 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.

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.

	RECS	MFUS	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.65	2.29	-0.64
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.31	3.28	-0.97
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.29	1.41	-0.12
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.28	4.08	-1.80
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	9.45	15.40	-5.95

RECS vs. MFUS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RECS Sharpe Ratio is 1.65, which is comparable to the MFUS Sharpe Ratio of 2.29. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RECS 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.

Drawdowns

RECS vs. MFUS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RECS drawdown since its inception was -34.29%, roughly equal to the maximum MFUS drawdown of -35.21%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RECS and MFUS.

Drawdown Indicators

	RECS	MFUS	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-34.29%	-35.21%	+0.92%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-8.82%	-6.39%	-2.43%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-18.60%	-15.39%	-3.21%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-22.08%	-18.22%	-3.86%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-34.29%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.10%	-2.18%	+1.08%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.28%	-3.95%	+2.67%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.12%	1.69%	+0.43%

Volatility

RECS vs. MFUS - Volatility Comparison

Columbia Research Enhanced Core ETF (RECS) has a higher volatility of 3.25% compared to PIMCO RAFI Dynamic Multi-Factor U.S. Equity ETF (MFUS) at 2.92%. This indicates that RECS's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than MFUS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	RECS	MFUS	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.25%	2.92%	+0.33%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	9.43%	9.12%	+0.31%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	12.22%	11.41%	+0.81%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	16.41%	15.02%	+1.39%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	16.30%	17.28%	-0.98%

RECS vs. MFUS - Expense Ratio Comparison

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

Dividends

RECS vs. MFUS - Dividend Comparison

RECS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.03%, less than MFUS's 1.37% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
MFUS PIMCO RAFI Dynamic Multi-Factor U.S. Equity ETF	1.37%	1.54%	1.45%	1.96%	2.07%	1.35%	1.72%	1.89%	1.69%	1.01%
RECS Columbia Research Enhanced Core ETF	1.03%	1.11%	1.09%	1.00%	1.41%	20.64%	1.09%	0.49%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both RECS and MFUS in my portfolio?

RECS and MFUS have a correlation of 0.74, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, RECS or MFUS?

RECS has higher volatility (3.25%) compared to MFUS (2.92%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RECS dropped -34.29% vs MFUS's -35.21%.

Which ETF is better, RECS or MFUS?

On 5-year performance, RECS leads with 13.31% vs 13.05% for MFUS. On fees, RECS is cheaper at 0.15% per year. On volatility, MFUS has been the lower-risk option at 2.92%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, RECS or MFUS?

Over the 5-year period, RECS has performed better with a 13.31% return vs 13.05%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, RECS or MFUS?

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

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

MFUS has the higher dividend yield at 1.37%, compared with 1.03% for RECS.

What is the main difference between RECS and MFUS?

RECS tracks Beta Advantage Research Enhanced U.S. Equity Index, while MFUS tracks RAFI Dynamic Multi-Factor U.S. Index​. They also come from different issuers: Ameriprise Financial and PIMCO. Their fees differ too: 0.15% for RECS and 0.30% for MFUS.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

MFUS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.29 vs 1.65), 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.