PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
ACVF vs. MTUM
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

ACVF vs. MTUM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in American Conservative Values ETF (ACVF) and iShares MSCI USA Momentum Factor ETF (MTUM). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ACVF achieves a 10.58% return, which is significantly lower than MTUM's 31.75% return.


ACVF

1D
-0.53%
1M
6.32%
YTD
10.58%
6M
11.23%
1Y
20.30%
3Y*
19.62%
5Y*
12.39%
10Y*

MTUM

1D
1.06%
1M
15.90%
YTD
31.75%
6M
32.38%
1Y
41.76%
3Y*
34.75%
5Y*
15.21%
10Y*
17.31%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

ACVF vs. MTUM - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020
ACVF
American Conservative Values ETF
10.58%13.67%20.56%23.81%-15.74%28.84%13.79%
MTUM
iShares MSCI USA Momentum Factor ETF
31.75%22.15%32.89%9.15%-18.27%13.36%12.40%

Correlation

The correlation between ACVF and MTUM is 0.83, 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

0.83

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.87

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.85

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 30, 2020

0.84

The correlation between ACVF and MTUM has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.83 to 0.87 - a consistent structural relationship.

ACVF vs. MTUM - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
ACVF
MTUM

Technology

39.7%
44.4%

Financial Services

11.6%
10.4%

Industrials

11.0%
15.6%

Consumer Cyclical

10.7%
3.6%

Healthcare

8.1%
6.9%

Consumer Defensive

5.9%
3.3%

Communication Services

4.2%
7.4%

Energy

3.5%
3.5%

Utilities

2.2%
1.6%

Real Estate

1.7%
1.8%

Basic Materials

1.6%
1.7%

Technology

ACVF
39.7%
MTUM
44.4%

Financial Services

ACVF
11.6%
MTUM
10.4%

Industrials

ACVF
11.0%
MTUM
15.6%

Consumer Cyclical

ACVF
10.7%
MTUM
3.6%

Healthcare

ACVF
8.1%
MTUM
6.9%

Consumer Defensive

ACVF
5.9%
MTUM
3.3%

Communication Services

ACVF
4.2%
MTUM
7.4%

Energy

ACVF
3.5%
MTUM
3.5%

Utilities

ACVF
2.2%
MTUM
1.6%

Real Estate

ACVF
1.7%
MTUM
1.8%

Basic Materials

ACVF
1.6%
MTUM
1.7%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.


Return for Risk

ACVF vs. MTUM — Risk / Return Rank

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

ACVF
ACVF Risk / Return Rank: 5454
Overall Rank
ACVF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5252
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ACVF Sortino Ratio Rank: 5252
Sortino Ratio Rank
ACVF Omega Ratio Rank: 5050
Omega Ratio Rank
ACVF Calmar Ratio Rank: 5353
Calmar Ratio Rank
ACVF Martin Ratio Rank: 6060
Martin Ratio Rank

MTUM
MTUM Risk / Return Rank: 6767
Overall Rank
MTUM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6464
Sharpe Ratio Rank
MTUM Sortino Ratio Rank: 6262
Sortino Ratio Rank
MTUM Omega Ratio Rank: 6363
Omega Ratio Rank
MTUM Calmar Ratio Rank: 7171
Calmar Ratio Rank
MTUM Martin Ratio Rank: 7575
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

ACVF vs. MTUM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for American Conservative Values ETF (ACVF) and iShares MSCI USA Momentum Factor ETF (MTUM). 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.


ACVFMTUMDifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

1.79

2.20

-0.41

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

2.53

2.98

-0.45

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

1.32

1.39

-0.08

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

2.65

3.64

-0.99

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

10.75

14.50

-3.75

ACVF vs. MTUM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ACVF Sharpe Ratio is 1.79, which is comparable to the MTUM Sharpe Ratio of 2.20. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ACVF and MTUM, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


ACVFMTUMDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.79

2.20

-0.41

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.77

0.74

+0.02

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.83

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

1.02

0.85

+0.17

Drawdowns

ACVF vs. MTUM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ACVF drawdown since its inception was -24.39%, smaller than the maximum MTUM drawdown of -34.08%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ACVF and MTUM.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


ACVFMTUMDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-24.39%

-34.08%

+9.69%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-7.70%

-11.54%

+3.84%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-16.82%

-20.99%

+4.17%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-24.39%

-32.28%

+7.89%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-34.08%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.53%

0.00%

-0.53%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-4.75%

-6.21%

+1.46%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.89%

2.89%

-1.00%

Volatility

ACVF vs. MTUM - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for American Conservative Values ETF (ACVF) is 3.06%, while iShares MSCI USA Momentum Factor ETF (MTUM) has a volatility of 7.68%. This indicates that ACVF experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than MTUM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


ACVFMTUMDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.06%

7.68%

-4.62%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

9.00%

16.46%

-7.46%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

11.41%

19.04%

-7.63%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

16.23%

20.60%

-4.37%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

15.97%

21.03%

-5.06%

ACVF vs. MTUM - Expense Ratio Comparison

ACVF has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is higher than MTUM's 0.15% expense ratio.


Dividends

ACVF vs. MTUM - Dividend Comparison

ACVF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.53%, less than MTUM's 0.60% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
ACVF
American Conservative Values ETF
0.53%0.59%0.59%0.82%0.93%0.61%0.23%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
MTUM
iShares MSCI USA Momentum Factor ETF
0.60%0.91%0.75%1.35%1.80%0.55%0.83%1.48%1.27%1.02%1.43%1.12%

Frequently Asked Questions


ACVF and MTUM have a correlation of 0.83, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

MTUM has higher volatility (7.68%) compared to ACVF (3.06%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ACVF dropped -24.39% vs MTUM's -34.08%.

On 5-year performance, MTUM leads with 15.21% vs 12.39% for ACVF. On fees, MTUM is cheaper at 0.15% per year. On volatility, ACVF has been the lower-risk option at 3.06%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 5-year period, MTUM has performed better with a 15.21% return vs 12.39%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

MTUM is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for ACVF.

MTUM has the higher dividend yield at 0.60%, compared with 0.53% for ACVF.

ACVF is categorized as Large Cap Blend Equities, while MTUM is Momentum. They also come from different issuers: Ridgeline Research LLC and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.75% for ACVF and 0.15% for MTUM.

MTUM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.20 vs 1.79), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for ACVF and MTUM

Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.

Open Portfolio Optimizer