BUL vs. TMFC

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

BUL (Pacer US Cash Cows Growth ETF) and TMFC (Motley Fool 100 Index ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - BUL is a Mid Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the Pacer US Cash Cows Growth Index, while TMFC is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund tracking the Motley Fool 100 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, BUL returned 11.26%/yr vs 15.96%/yr for TMFC. A 0.72 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. BUL charges 0.60%/yr vs 0.50%/yr for TMFC.

Performance

BUL vs. TMFC - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Pacer US Cash Cows Growth ETF (BUL) and Motley Fool 100 Index ETF (TMFC). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BUL achieves a 9.02% return, which is significantly higher than TMFC's 8.44% return.

BUL

• 1D: 0.04%
• 1M: 5.95%
• YTD: 9.02%
• 6M: 10.73%
• 1Y: 25.79%
• 3Y*: 22.33%
• 5Y*: 11.26%
• 10Y*: —

TMFC

• 1D: -0.85%
• 1M: 4.54%
• YTD: 8.44%
• 6M: 8.14%
• 1Y: 25.76%
• 3Y*: 26.20%
• 5Y*: 15.96%
• 10Y*: —

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

BUL vs. TMFC - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019
BUL Pacer US Cash Cows Growth ETF	9.02%	19.18%	27.39%	3.68%	-16.18%	32.48%	27.26%	4.81%
TMFC Motley Fool 100 Index ETF	8.44%	19.55%	35.17%	47.04%	-30.86%	25.30%	42.00%	11.42%

Correlation

The correlation between BUL and TMFC is 0.64, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.64
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.62
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.70
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 6, 2019	0.72

The correlation between BUL and TMFC shifts across timeframes, from 0.62 (3 years) to 0.72 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

BUL vs. TMFC - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	BUL	TMFC
Technology	28.3%	41.4%
Consumer Cyclical	22.3%	11.4%
Healthcare	21.4%	4.8%
Industrials	13.4%	4.0%
Basic Materials	5.7%	0.6%
Energy	5.1%	1.9%
Consumer Defensive	2.3%	4.3%
Communication Services	1.6%	17.4%
Financial Services	-	12.9%
Real Estate	-	0.9%
Utilities	-	0.5%

Return for Risk

BUL vs. TMFC — Risk / Return Rank

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

BUL

BUL Risk / Return Rank: 50
BUL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 44
BUL Sortino Ratio Rank: 46
BUL Omega Ratio Rank: 42
BUL Calmar Ratio Rank: 58
BUL Martin Ratio Rank: 59

TMFC

TMFC Risk / Return Rank: 49
TMFC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 55
TMFC Sortino Ratio Rank: 53
TMFC Omega Ratio Rank: 53
TMFC Calmar Ratio Rank: 40
TMFC Martin Ratio Rank: 46

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.

BUL vs. TMFC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Pacer US Cash Cows Growth ETF (BUL) and Motley Fool 100 Index ETF (TMFC). 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.

	BUL	TMFC	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.55	1.91	-0.37
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.30	2.63	-0.32
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.27	1.33	-0.06
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.90	2.05	+0.85
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	10.49	7.63	+2.86
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

BUL vs. TMFC - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BUL Sharpe Ratio is 1.55, which is comparable to the TMFC Sharpe Ratio of 1.91. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BUL and TMFC, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	BUL	TMFC	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.55	1.91	-0.37
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.52	0.79	-0.27
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.58	0.83	-0.25

Drawdowns

BUL vs. TMFC - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BUL drawdown since its inception was -37.08%, which is greater than TMFC's maximum drawdown of -33.06%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BUL and TMFC.

Drawdown Indicators

	BUL	TMFC	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-37.08%	-33.06%	-4.02%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-8.93%	-12.64%	+3.71%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-23.55%	-20.06%	-3.49%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-27.85%	-33.06%	+5.21%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	-1.11%	+1.11%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-7.65%	-6.77%	-0.88%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.46%	3.39%	-0.93%

Volatility

BUL vs. TMFC - Volatility Comparison

Pacer US Cash Cows Growth ETF (BUL) has a higher volatility of 5.32% compared to Motley Fool 100 Index ETF (TMFC) at 3.21%. This indicates that BUL's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than TMFC based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	BUL	TMFC	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.32%	3.21%	+2.11%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	11.88%	10.11%	+1.77%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	16.78%	13.52%	+3.26%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	21.79%	20.37%	+1.42%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	24.25%	21.99%	+2.26%

BUL vs. TMFC - Expense Ratio Comparison

BUL has a 0.60% expense ratio, which is higher than TMFC's 0.50% expense ratio.

Dividends

BUL vs. TMFC - Dividend Comparison

BUL's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.23%, more than TMFC's 0.13% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018
BUL Pacer US Cash Cows Growth ETF	0.23%	0.28%	0.30%	2.11%	0.67%	0.08%	0.69%	0.81%	0.00%
TMFC Motley Fool 100 Index ETF	0.13%	0.14%	0.40%	0.26%	0.27%	0.23%	0.42%	0.50%	0.61%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both BUL and TMFC in my portfolio?

BUL and TMFC have a correlation of 0.64, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, BUL or TMFC?

BUL has higher volatility (5.32%) compared to TMFC (3.21%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BUL dropped -37.08% vs TMFC's -33.06%.

Which ETF is better, BUL or TMFC?

On 5-year performance, TMFC leads with 15.96% vs 11.26% for BUL. On fees, TMFC is cheaper at 0.50% per year. On volatility, TMFC has been the lower-risk option at 3.21%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, BUL or TMFC?

Over the 5-year period, TMFC has performed better with a 15.96% return vs 11.26%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, BUL or TMFC?

TMFC is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for BUL.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, BUL or TMFC?

BUL has the higher dividend yield at 0.23%, compared with 0.13% for TMFC.

What is the main difference between BUL and TMFC?

BUL is categorized as Mid Cap Blend Equities, while TMFC is Large Cap Growth Equities. BUL tracks Pacer US Cash Cows Growth Index, while TMFC tracks Motley Fool 100 Index. They also come from different issuers: Pacer and Motley Fool. Their fees differ too: 0.60% for BUL and 0.50% for TMFC.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

TMFC currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.91 vs 1.55), 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.