BDIV vs. MFVL

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

BDIV (AAM Brentview Dividend Growth ETF) and MFVL (Motley Fool Value Factor ETF) are both Large Cap Value Equities funds. Both are actively managed. At a 0.46 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. BDIV charges 0.49%/yr vs 0.50%/yr for MFVL.

Performance

BDIV vs. MFVL - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in AAM Brentview Dividend Growth ETF (BDIV) and Motley Fool Value Factor ETF (MFVL). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BDIV achieves a 7.77% return, which is significantly higher than MFVL's -2.40% return.

BDIV

• 1D: -0.44%
• 1M: 0.02%
• YTD: 7.77%
• 6M: 7.37%
• 1Y: 20.14%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

MFVL

• 1D: 0.75%
• 1M: -2.65%
• YTD: -2.40%
• 6M: -2.69%
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

BDIV vs. MFVL - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
BDIV AAM Brentview Dividend Growth ETF	7.77%	0.20%
MFVL Motley Fool Value Factor ETF	-2.40%	1.22%

Correlation

The correlation between BDIV and MFVL is 0.46, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 9, 2025	0.46

Return for Risk

BDIV vs. MFVL — Risk / Return Rank

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

BDIV

BDIV Risk / Return Rank: 69
BDIV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 72
BDIV Sortino Ratio Rank: 75
BDIV Omega Ratio Rank: 69
BDIV Calmar Ratio Rank: 64
BDIV Martin Ratio Rank: 68

MFVL

Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.

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.

BDIV vs. MFVL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for AAM Brentview Dividend Growth ETF (BDIV) and Motley Fool Value Factor ETF (MFVL). 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.

	BDIV	MFVL	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.10	—	—
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.05	—	—
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.37	—	—
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.88	—	—
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	11.45	—	—

Drawdowns

BDIV vs. MFVL - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BDIV drawdown since its inception was -14.98%, which is greater than MFVL's maximum drawdown of -7.03%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BDIV and MFVL.

Drawdown Indicators

	BDIV	MFVL	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-14.98%	-7.03%	-7.95%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-7.01%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.23%	-5.97%	+4.74%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.95%	-2.60%	+0.65%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.76%	—	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	BDIV	MFVL	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.51%	—	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	7.32%	—	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	9.71%	12.14%	-2.43%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	13.30%	12.14%	+1.16%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	13.30%	12.14%	+1.16%

BDIV vs. MFVL - Expense Ratio Comparison

BDIV has a 0.49% expense ratio, which is lower than MFVL's 0.50% expense ratio.

Dividends

BDIV vs. MFVL - Dividend Comparison

BDIV's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.58%, while MFVL has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024
BDIV AAM Brentview Dividend Growth ETF	1.58%	1.14%	0.62%
MFVL Motley Fool Value Factor ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both BDIV and MFVL in my portfolio?

BDIV and MFVL have a correlation of 0.46, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, BDIV or MFVL?

On fees, BDIV is cheaper at 0.49% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, BDIV or MFVL?

BDIV is cheaper with a 0.49% expense ratio, compared with 0.50% for MFVL.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, BDIV or MFVL?

BDIV has the higher dividend yield at 1.58%, compared with 0.00% for MFVL.

What is the main difference between BDIV and MFVL?

They also come from different issuers: AAM and Motley Fool. Their fees differ too: 0.49% for BDIV and 0.50% for MFVL.