RWL vs. MFUS

Last updated Jun 23, 2026

RWL (Invesco S&P 500 Revenue ETF) and MFUS (PIMCO RAFI Dynamic Multi-Factor U.S. Equity ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - RWL is a S&P 500 fund tracking the S&P 500 Revenue-Weighted Index, while MFUS is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund tracking the RAFI Dynamic Multi-Factor U.S. Index​. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, RWL returned 13.46%/yr vs 13.48%/yr for MFUS. Their correlation of 0.91 suggests significant overlap in exposure. RWL charges 0.39%/yr vs 0.30%/yr for MFUS.

Performance

RWL vs. MFUS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Invesco S&P 500 Revenue ETF (RWL) 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, RWL achieves a 11.62% return, which is significantly lower than MFUS's 18.31% return.

RWL

• 1D: 0.01%
• 1M: 0.79%
• YTD: 11.62%
• 6M: 11.23%
• 1Y: 26.48%
• 3Y*: 19.53%
• 5Y*: 13.46%
• 10Y*: 14.31%

MFUS

• 1D: 0.68%
• 1M: 3.47%
• YTD: 18.31%
• 6M: 17.50%
• 1Y: 30.42%
• 3Y*: 22.30%
• 5Y*: 13.48%
• 10Y*: —

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

RWL vs. MFUS - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
RWL Invesco S&P 500 Revenue ETF	11.62%	18.65%	16.45%	17.43%	-6.00%	30.29%	9.14%	27.83%	-7.74%	11.53%
MFUS PIMCO RAFI Dynamic Multi-Factor U.S. Equity ETF	18.31%	16.02%	20.17%	12.19%	-5.82%	24.10%	10.64%	26.17%	-7.30%	11.20%

Correlation

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

RWL vs. MFUS - Sectors Allocation Comparison

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

Return for Risk

RWL vs. MFUS — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

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: 85

MFUS

MFUS Risk / Return Rank: 87
MFUS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 87
MFUS Sortino Ratio Rank: 88
MFUS Omega Ratio Rank: 85
MFUS Calmar Ratio Rank: 87
MFUS Martin Ratio Rank: 90

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.

RWL vs. MFUS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco S&P 500 Revenue ETF (RWL) 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.

	RWL	MFUS	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.61	2.73	-0.12
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.61	3.86	-0.24
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.46	1.49	-0.03
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.01	4.79	-0.78
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	16.81	19.46	-2.65

RWL vs. MFUS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RWL Sharpe Ratio is 2.61, which is comparable to the MFUS Sharpe Ratio of 2.73. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RWL 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

RWL vs. MFUS - Drawdown Comparison

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

Drawdown Indicators

	RWL	MFUS	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-54.83%	-35.21%	-19.62%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-6.64%	-6.39%	-0.25%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-14.39%	-15.39%	+1.00%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-17.49%	-18.22%	+0.73%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-36.04%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.66%	-0.03%	-1.63%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-6.43%	-3.98%	-2.45%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.58%	1.57%	+0.01%

Volatility

RWL vs. MFUS - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Invesco S&P 500 Revenue ETF (RWL) is 3.16%, while PIMCO RAFI Dynamic Multi-Factor U.S. Equity ETF (MFUS) has a volatility of 4.10%. This indicates that RWL experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than MFUS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	RWL	MFUS	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.16%	4.10%	-0.94%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	7.43%	8.84%	-1.41%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	10.22%	11.22%	-1.00%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	14.51%	15.08%	-0.57%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	16.88%	17.35%	-0.47%

RWL vs. MFUS - Expense Ratio Comparison

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

Dividends

RWL vs. MFUS - Dividend Comparison

RWL's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.55%, more than MFUS's 1.33% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
MFUS PIMCO RAFI Dynamic Multi-Factor U.S. Equity ETF	1.33%	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 RWL and MFUS in my portfolio?

RWL and MFUS 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, RWL or MFUS?

MFUS has higher volatility (4.10%) compared to RWL (3.16%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RWL dropped -54.83% vs MFUS's -35.21%.

Which ETF is better, RWL or MFUS?

On 5-year performance, MFUS leads with 13.48% vs 13.46% for RWL. 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, RWL or MFUS?

Over the 5-year period, MFUS has performed better with a 13.48% return vs 13.46%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, RWL or MFUS?

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

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

RWL has the higher dividend yield at 1.55%, compared with 1.33% for MFUS.

What is the main difference between RWL and MFUS?

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

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

MFUS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.73 vs 2.61), 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.