MFEM vs SPGM
PIMCO RAFI Dynamic Multi-Factor Emerging Markets Equity ETF vs State Street SPDR Portfolio MSCI Global Stock Market ETF
Quick Verdict
SPGM has a lower expense ratio. MFEM delivered stronger 1-year returns. SPGM offers more diversification with 2,985 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | MFEM | SPGM | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.49% | 0.09% | |
| AUM | $156M | $1.8B | |
| Dividend Yield | 2.39% | 1.81% | |
| Holdings | 701 | 2,985 | |
| YTD Return | +21.80% | +14.45% | |
| 1Y Return | +33.81% | +25.63% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +20.43% | +22.00% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +8.97% | +11.59% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 17.7% | 13.6% | |
| Max Drawdown | -45.3% | -34.0% | |
| Fund Family | PIMCO (US) | SPDR State Street Global Advisors | |
| Category | Equity | Equity | |
| Inception | Aug 31, 2017 | Feb 27, 2012 |
MFEM vs SPGM Performance
PIMCO RAFI Dynamic Multi-Factor Emerging Markets Equity ETF (MFEM) is a ETF from PIMCO (US) and State Street SPDR Portfolio MSCI Global Stock Market ETF (SPGM) is a ETF from SPDR State Street Global Advisors. Over the past year MFEM returned +33.81% while SPGM returned +25.63%. Year to date, MFEM is up 21.80% versus a gain of 14.45% for SPGM.
Over three years, MFEM compounded at +20.43% per year against +22.00% for SPGM; over five years the annualized figures are +8.97% and +11.59% respectively. Across the full 9-year window we track, SPGM has the edge at +9.87% annualized vs +6.84%. 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 13.6% for SPGM. 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 -45.3% for MFEM and -34.0% for SPGM. 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 0.83. They usually move together, but the gap leaves some room for diversification.
Fees and Cost Over Time
MFEM charges 0.49% per year while SPGM charges 0.09%. On a $10,000 position that is $49 vs $9 annually, a gap of $40 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, MFEM currently yields 2.39% against 1.81% for SPGM.
Holdings Overlap
MFEM and SPGM share 97 holdings out of 3252 unique holdings combined, representing a 1.9% weight overlap.
Moderate overlap means holding both could provide meaningful diversification benefits.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, MFEM or SPGM?
MFEM has an expense ratio of 0.49% while SPGM charges 0.09%. SPGM is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $40 per year of difference.
Which performed better, MFEM or SPGM?
Over the past year MFEM returned +33.81% vs +25.63% for SPGM, so MFEM leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (9 years), MFEM annualized +6.84% vs +9.87% for SPGM. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, MFEM or SPGM?
MFEM has been the more volatile fund at 17.7% annualized versus 13.6% for SPGM. Worst drawdown: MFEM -45.3% vs SPGM -34.0%.
Should I hold both MFEM and SPGM?
MFEM and SPGM have a monthly-return correlation of 0.83, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between MFEM and SPGM?
MFEM and SPGM share 97 common holdings with a 1.9% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 3252 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, MFEM or SPGM?
MFEM yields 2.39% while SPGM yields 1.81%, so MFEM 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.