RUNN vs. MIDE

Last updated Aug 4, 2026

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 9.72%/yr vs 14.02%/yr for MIDE. Their correlation of 0.81 means they have usually moved in the same direction. RUNN charges 0.58%/yr vs 0.15%/yr for MIDE.

Performance

RUNN vs. MIDE - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Running Oak Efficient Growth ETF (RUNN) and Xtrackers S&P MidCap 400 ESG ETF (MIDE). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, RUNN achieves a 3.56% return, which is significantly lower than MIDE's 16.15% return.

RUNN

• 1D: 1.59%
• 1M: 3.78%
• 6M: -0.46%
• YTD: 3.56%
• 1Y: 3.30%
• 3Y*: 9.72%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 10.97%

MIDE

• 1D: 0.93%
• 1M: 0.72%
• 6M: 10.72%
• YTD: 16.15%
• 1Y: 26.71%
• 3Y*: 14.02%
• 5Y*: 8.91%
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 9.21%

*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)
MIDE Xtrackers S&P MidCap 400 ESG ETF	$7.19K	$26.37K	$22.11K
RUNN Running Oak Efficient Growth ETF	$1.22M	$3.95M	$2.56M

RUNN vs. MIDE - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
RUNN Running Oak Efficient Growth ETF	3.56%	2.30%	17.16%	11.90%
MIDE Xtrackers S&P MidCap 400 ESG ETF	16.15%	9.81%	11.21%	9.88%

Correlation

The correlation between RUNN and MIDE is 0.69, 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.	0.69
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history.	0.82
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 8, 2023	0.81

The correlation between RUNN and MIDE shifts across timeframes, from 0.69 (1 year) to 0.82 (3 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

RUNN vs. MIDE - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	RUNN	MIDE
Industrials	36.0%	19.6%
Technology	19.6%	13.7%
Healthcare	13.3%	9.7%
Financial Services	12.8%	16.6%
Consumer Cyclical	8.3%	10.7%
Basic Materials	3.7%	7.2%
Communication Services	2.1%	1.1%
Consumer Defensive	-	3.4%
Energy	-	6.0%
Real Estate	-	9.1%
Utilities	-	1.7%

Return for Risk

RUNN vs. MIDE — Risk / Return Rank

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

RUNN

RUNN Risk / Return Rank: 15
RUNN Sharpe Ratio Rank: 16
RUNN Sortino Ratio Rank: 15
RUNN Omega Ratio Rank: 15
RUNN Calmar Ratio Rank: 16
RUNN Martin Ratio Rank: 15

MIDE

MIDE Risk / Return Rank: 73
MIDE Sharpe Ratio Rank: 71
MIDE Sortino Ratio Rank: 72
MIDE Omega Ratio Rank: 68
MIDE Calmar Ratio Rank: 77
MIDE Martin Ratio Rank: 77

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.

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 ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.24	1.70	-1.46
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.46	2.48	-2.02
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.05	1.30	-0.25
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.32	2.87	-2.54
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	0.68	10.31	-9.63

RUNN vs. MIDE - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RUNN Sharpe Ratio is 0.24, which is lower than the MIDE Sharpe Ratio of 1.70. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RUNN and MIDE, 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

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.

Drawdown Indicators

	RUNN	MIDE	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest 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 Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.66%	-0.53%	-1.13%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.68%	-6.33%	+2.65%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.90%	2.60%	+2.30%

Volatility

RUNN vs. MIDE - Volatility Comparison

Running Oak Efficient Growth ETF (RUNN) has a higher volatility of 5.02% compared to Xtrackers S&P MidCap 400 ESG ETF (MIDE) at 3.48%. This indicates that RUNN's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than MIDE based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	RUNN	MIDE	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.02%	3.48%	+1.54%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	10.52%	11.54%	-1.02%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	13.65%	15.78%	-2.13%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	13.92%	19.62%	-5.70%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	13.92%	19.51%	-5.59%

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 0.54%, less than MIDE's 1.25% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
MIDE Xtrackers S&P MidCap 400 ESG ETF	1.25%	1.52%	1.45%	1.36%	1.33%	0.93%
RUNN Running Oak Efficient Growth ETF	0.54%	0.55%	0.39%	0.33%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both RUNN and MIDE in my portfolio?

RUNN and MIDE have a correlation of 0.69, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, RUNN or MIDE?

RUNN has higher volatility (5.02%) compared to MIDE (3.48%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RUNN dropped -16.83% vs MIDE's -24.59%.

Which ETF is better, RUNN or MIDE?

On 3-year performance, MIDE leads with 14.02% vs 9.72% for RUNN. On fees, MIDE is cheaper at 0.15% per year. On volatility, MIDE has been the lower-risk option at 3.48%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, RUNN or MIDE?

Over the 3-year period, MIDE has performed better with a 14.02% return vs 9.72%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, RUNN or MIDE?

MIDE is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.58% for RUNN.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, RUNN or MIDE?

MIDE has the higher dividend yield at 1.25%, compared with 0.54% for RUNN.

What is the main difference between RUNN and MIDE?

They also come from different issuers: Running Oak and Deutsche Bank. Their fees differ too: 0.58% for RUNN and 0.15% for MIDE.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

MIDE currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.70 vs 0.24), 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.