EAOK vs. MFUL

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

EAOK (iShares ESG Aware Conservative Allocation ETF) and MFUL (Mindful Conservative ETF) are both Diversified Portfolio funds. EAOK is passively managed, while MFUL is actively managed. Over the past 3 years, EAOK returned 8.79%/yr vs 4.96%/yr for MFUL. A 0.71 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. EAOK charges 0.18%/yr vs 1.10%/yr for MFUL.

Performance

EAOK vs. MFUL - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares ESG Aware Conservative Allocation ETF (EAOK) and Mindful Conservative ETF (MFUL). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, EAOK achieves a 3.85% return, which is significantly higher than MFUL's 3.28% return.

EAOK

• 1D: -0.39%
• 1M: 1.83%
• YTD: 3.85%
• 6M: 3.87%
• 1Y: 12.25%
• 3Y*: 8.79%
• 5Y*: 3.20%
• 10Y*: —

MFUL

• 1D: -0.28%
• 1M: 1.45%
• YTD: 3.28%
• 6M: 3.33%
• 1Y: 7.13%
• 3Y*: 4.96%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

EAOK vs. MFUL - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
EAOK iShares ESG Aware Conservative Allocation ETF	3.85%	11.47%	5.81%	10.13%	-14.92%	-0.11%
MFUL Mindful Conservative ETF	3.28%	4.51%	5.36%	2.24%	-12.46%	-1.61%

Correlation

The correlation between EAOK and MFUL is 0.87, 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	0.87
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.85
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 4, 2021	0.71

The correlation between EAOK and MFUL shifts across timeframes, from 0.71 (all time) to 0.87 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

EAOK vs. MFUL - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	EAOK	MFUL
Technology	10.2%	25.8%
Financial Services	4.8%	10.7%
Industrials	3.2%	9.9%
Consumer Cyclical	2.7%	8.7%
Communication Services	2.6%	8.4%
Healthcare	2.4%	8.4%
Consumer Defensive	1.3%	6.7%
Energy	1.1%	8.0%
Basic Materials	0.8%	5.5%
Utilities	0.8%	5.5%
Real Estate	0.6%	2.4%

Return for Risk

EAOK vs. MFUL — Risk / Return Rank

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

EAOK

EAOK Risk / Return Rank: 67
EAOK Sharpe Ratio Rank: 68
EAOK Sortino Ratio Rank: 72
EAOK Omega Ratio Rank: 71
EAOK Calmar Ratio Rank: 57
EAOK Martin Ratio Rank: 67

MFUL

MFUL Risk / Return Rank: 52
MFUL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 54
MFUL Sortino Ratio Rank: 54
MFUL Omega Ratio Rank: 58
MFUL Calmar Ratio Rank: 43
MFUL Martin Ratio Rank: 50

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.

EAOK vs. MFUL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares ESG Aware Conservative Allocation ETF (EAOK) and Mindful Conservative ETF (MFUL). 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.

	EAOK	MFUL	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.24	1.82	+0.42
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.28	2.59	+0.69
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.43	1.35	+0.08
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.78	2.13	+0.65
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	12.14	8.24	+3.90
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

EAOK vs. MFUL - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EAOK Sharpe Ratio is 2.24, which is comparable to the MFUL Sharpe Ratio of 1.82. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EAOK and MFUL, 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

	EAOK	MFUL	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.24	1.82	+0.42
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.46	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.65	0.01	+0.64

Drawdowns

EAOK vs. MFUL - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EAOK drawdown since its inception was -19.91%, which is greater than MFUL's maximum drawdown of -16.41%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EAOK and MFUL.

Drawdown Indicators

	EAOK	MFUL	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-19.91%	-16.41%	-3.50%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-4.43%	-3.36%	-1.07%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-7.08%	-4.74%	-2.34%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-19.91%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.39%	-0.46%	+0.07%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-5.02%	-9.50%	+4.48%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.01%	0.87%	+0.14%

Volatility

EAOK vs. MFUL - Volatility Comparison

iShares ESG Aware Conservative Allocation ETF (EAOK) has a higher volatility of 2.05% compared to Mindful Conservative ETF (MFUL) at 1.46%. This indicates that EAOK's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than MFUL based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	EAOK	MFUL	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.05%	1.46%	+0.59%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	4.48%	3.23%	+1.25%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	5.49%	3.93%	+1.56%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	7.04%	4.24%	+2.80%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	6.83%	4.24%	+2.59%

EAOK vs. MFUL - Expense Ratio Comparison

EAOK has a 0.18% expense ratio, which is lower than MFUL's 1.10% expense ratio.

Dividends

EAOK vs. MFUL - Dividend Comparison

EAOK's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.17%, more than MFUL's 3.01% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
EAOK iShares ESG Aware Conservative Allocation ETF	3.17%	3.18%	3.15%	2.80%	2.27%	1.19%	1.00%
MFUL Mindful Conservative ETF	3.01%	3.31%	2.59%	5.00%	0.29%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both EAOK and MFUL in my portfolio?

EAOK and MFUL have a correlation of 0.87, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, EAOK or MFUL?

EAOK has higher volatility (2.05%) compared to MFUL (1.46%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EAOK dropped -19.91% vs MFUL's -16.41%.

Which ETF is better, EAOK or MFUL?

On 3-year performance, EAOK leads with 8.79% vs 4.96% for MFUL. On fees, EAOK is cheaper at 0.18% per year. On volatility, MFUL has been the lower-risk option at 1.46%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, EAOK or MFUL?

Over the 3-year period, EAOK has performed better with a 8.79% return vs 4.96%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, EAOK or MFUL?

EAOK is cheaper with a 0.18% expense ratio, compared with 1.10% for MFUL.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, EAOK or MFUL?

EAOK has the higher dividend yield at 3.17%, compared with 3.01% for MFUL.

What is the main difference between EAOK and MFUL?

They also come from different issuers: iShares and Mohr Funds. Their fees differ too: 0.18% for EAOK and 1.10% for MFUL.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

EAOK currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.24 vs 1.82), 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.