Skip to content
Beacon
Screener

RECS vs ECON

Columbia Research Enhanced Core ETF vs Columbia Research Enhanced Emerging Economies ETF

RECS

Columbia Research Enhanced Core ETF

Columbia Threadneedle

Annual cost

0.15%

Fund size

$5.4B

ECON

Columbia Research Enhanced Emerging Economies ETF

Columbia Threadneedle

Annual cost

0.47%

Fund size

$326M

Key differences

  • RECS costs 0.32% less per year.
  • RECS is significantly larger than ECON — larger funds tend to be more liquid and less likely to close.
  • RECS covers north america markets; ECON covers emerging markets.
  • Over the last 3 years, ECON has delivered higher annualized returns.
  • ECON has a longer track record, which may reduce uncertainty around long-term behavior.

Side-by-side comparison

RECSECON
Annual cost (TER)0.15%0.47%
Fund size (AUM)$5.4B$326M
Since20192010
Dividend yield0.77%1.51%
Asset classequityequity
Regionnorth americaemerging markets
Strategyindex trackingindex tracking
CAGR 1Y+27.9%+60.5%
CAGR 3Y+22.1%+23.8%
CAGR 5Y+14.5%+7.6%
Sharpe 3Y1.201.08
Volatility 1Y11.92%20.32%
Max drawdown-34.29%-45.37%

Green dot indicates the better value for that metric. Performance data is historical and does not predict future results.

Similar to RECS and ECON