RUNN vs. MIDE
RUNN (Running Oak Efficient Growth ETF) and MIDE (Xtrackers S&P MidCap 400 ESG ETF) are both Mid Cap Blend Equities funds. RUNN is actively managed, while MIDE is passively managed. Over the past 3 years, RUNN returned 7.89%/yr vs 16.08%/yr for MIDE. Their correlation of 0.84 suggests significant overlap in exposure. RUNN charges 0.58%/yr vs 0.15%/yr for MIDE.
Performance
RUNN vs. MIDE - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, RUNN achieves a -4.70% return, which is significantly lower than MIDE's 14.24% return.
RUNN
- 1D
- -0.03%
- 1M
- -2.61%
- YTD
- -4.70%
- 6M
- -5.86%
- 1Y
- -3.73%
- 3Y*
- 7.89%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
MIDE
- 1D
- -0.85%
- 1M
- 2.52%
- YTD
- 14.24%
- 6M
- 12.29%
- 1Y
- 27.07%
- 3Y*
- 16.08%
- 5Y*
- 8.50%
- 10Y*
- —
RUNN vs. MIDE - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
RUNN Running Oak Efficient Growth ETF | -4.70% | 2.30% | 17.16% | 11.90% |
MIDE Xtrackers S&P MidCap 400 ESG ETF | 14.24% | 9.81% | 11.21% | 9.88% |
Correlation
The correlation between RUNN and MIDE is 0.77, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.77 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.84 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 8, 2023 | 0.84 |
The correlation between RUNN and MIDE has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.77 to 0.84 - a consistent structural relationship.
RUNN vs. MIDE - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
RUNN
MIDE
Industrials
Technology
Healthcare
Financial Services
Consumer Cyclical
Communication Services
Basic Materials
Consumer Defensive
-
Energy
-
Real Estate
-
Utilities
-
Industrials
RUNN
MIDE
Technology
RUNN
MIDE
Healthcare
RUNN
MIDE
Financial Services
RUNN
MIDE
Consumer Cyclical
RUNN
MIDE
Communication Services
RUNN
MIDE
Basic Materials
RUNN
MIDE
Consumer Defensive
RUNN
-
MIDE
Energy
RUNN
-
MIDE
Real Estate
RUNN
-
MIDE
Utilities
RUNN
-
MIDE
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
RUNN vs. MIDE — Risk / Return Rank
RUNN
MIDE
RUNN vs. MIDE - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Running Oak Efficient Growth ETF (RUNN) and Xtrackers S&P MidCap 400 ESG ETF (MIDE). 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.
| RUNN | MIDE | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -1.98 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -2.78 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 0.96 | 1.30 | -0.33 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.36 | 2.90 | -3.27 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -0.79 | 10.33 | -11.12 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
RUNN vs. MIDE - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum RUNN drawdown since its inception was -16.83%, smaller than the maximum MIDE drawdown of -24.59%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RUNN and MIDE.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| RUNN | MIDE | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -16.83% | -24.59% | +7.76% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -10.34% | -9.36% | -0.98% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -16.83% | -24.59% | +7.76% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -24.59% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -9.50% | -0.98% | -8.52% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -3.61% | -6.44% | +2.83% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 4.70% | 2.63% | +2.07% |
Volatility
RUNN vs. MIDE - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Running Oak Efficient Growth ETF (RUNN) is 3.89%, while Xtrackers S&P MidCap 400 ESG ETF (MIDE) has a volatility of 4.58%. This indicates that RUNN experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than MIDE based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| RUNN | MIDE | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 3.89% | 4.58% | -0.69% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 9.90% | 11.72% | -1.82% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 13.04% | 16.07% | -3.03% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 13.80% | 19.72% | -5.92% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 13.80% | 19.65% | -5.85% |
RUNN vs. MIDE - Expense Ratio Comparison
RUNN has a 0.58% expense ratio, which is higher than MIDE's 0.15% expense ratio.
Dividends
RUNN vs. MIDE - Dividend Comparison
RUNN's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.58%, less than MIDE's 1.27% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
MIDE Xtrackers S&P MidCap 400 ESG ETF | 1.27% | 1.52% | 1.45% | 1.36% | 1.33% | 0.93% |
RUNN Running Oak Efficient Growth ETF | 0.58% | 0.55% | 0.39% | 0.33% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
RUNN and MIDE have a correlation of 0.77, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
MIDE has higher volatility (4.58%) compared to RUNN (3.89%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RUNN dropped -16.83% vs MIDE's -24.59%.
On 3-year performance, MIDE leads with 16.08% vs 7.89% for RUNN. On fees, MIDE is cheaper at 0.15% per year. On volatility, RUNN has been the lower-risk option at 3.89%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 3-year period, MIDE has performed better with a 16.08% return vs 7.89%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
MIDE is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.58% for RUNN.
MIDE has the higher dividend yield at 1.27%, compared with 0.58% for RUNN.
They also come from different issuers: Running Oak Capital and Deutsche Bank. Their fees differ too: 0.58% for RUNN and 0.15% for MIDE.
MIDE currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.69 vs -0.29), 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 RUNN and MIDE
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