GTOS vs MFEM
Invesco Short Duration Total Return Bond ETF vs PIMCO RAFI Dynamic Multi-Factor Emerging Markets Equity ETF
Quick Verdict
GTOS has a lower expense ratio. MFEM delivered stronger 1-year returns. GTOS offers more diversification with 703 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | GTOS | MFEM | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.30% | 0.49% | |
| AUM | $124M | $156M | |
| Dividend Yield | 4.52% | 2.39% | |
| Holdings | 703 | 701 | |
| YTD Return | -0.75% | +21.80% | |
| 1Y Return | +1.23% | +33.81% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +4.69% | +20.43% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | - | +8.97% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 1.9% | 17.7% | |
| Max Drawdown | -1.8% | -45.3% | |
| Fund Family | Invesco (US) | PIMCO (US) | |
| Category | Fixed Income | Equity | |
| Inception | Dec 9, 2022 | Aug 31, 2017 |
GTOS vs MFEM Performance
Invesco Short Duration Total Return Bond ETF (GTOS) is a ETF from Invesco (US) and PIMCO RAFI Dynamic Multi-Factor Emerging Markets Equity ETF (MFEM) is a ETF from PIMCO (US). Over the past year GTOS returned +1.23% while MFEM returned +33.81%. Year to date, GTOS is down 0.75% versus a gain of 21.80% for MFEM.
Over three years, GTOS compounded at +4.69% per year against +20.43% for MFEM. Across the full 4-year window we track, MFEM has the edge at +6.84% annualized vs +4.29%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
MFEM has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 17.7% compared with 1.9% for GTOS. Lower volatility generally means a smoother ride, though it often comes with lower long-run returns.
The deepest peak-to-trough decline in our data was -1.8% for GTOS and -45.3% for MFEM. Drawdown depth is worth weighing if you expect to sell during market stress rather than ride it out.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.45. They move independently enough that combining them can meaningfully diversify a portfolio.
Fees and Cost Over Time
GTOS charges 0.30% per year while MFEM charges 0.49%. On a $10,000 position that is $30 vs $49 annually, a gap of $19 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, GTOS currently yields 4.52% against 2.39% for MFEM.
Holdings Overlap
GTOS and MFEM share 0 holdings out of 762 unique holdings combined, representing a 0.0% weight overlap.
Moderate overlap means holding both could provide meaningful diversification benefits.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, GTOS or MFEM?
GTOS has an expense ratio of 0.30% while MFEM charges 0.49%. GTOS is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $19 per year of difference.
Which performed better, GTOS or MFEM?
Over the past year GTOS returned +1.23% vs +33.81% for MFEM, so MFEM leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (4 years), GTOS annualized +4.29% vs +6.84% for MFEM. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, GTOS or MFEM?
MFEM has been the more volatile fund at 17.7% annualized versus 1.9% for GTOS. Worst drawdown: GTOS -1.8% vs MFEM -45.3%.
Should I hold both GTOS and MFEM?
GTOS and MFEM have a monthly-return correlation of 0.45, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between GTOS and MFEM?
GTOS and MFEM share 0 common holdings with a 0.0% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 762 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, GTOS or MFEM?
GTOS yields 4.52% while MFEM yields 2.39%, so GTOS currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Popular ETF Comparisons
Get Full ETF Analytics
Access complete holdings data, overlap analysis, screener tools, and more with FundXLS.