GABF vs. TMFG

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

GABF (Gabelli Financial Services Opportunities ETF) and TMFG (Motley Fool Global Opportunities ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - GABF is a Financials Equities fund actively managed by Gabelli, while TMFG is a Global Equities fund actively managed by Motley Fool. Both are actively managed. Over the past 3 years, GABF returned 20.47%/yr vs 12.53%/yr for TMFG. A 0.75 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. GABF charges 0.10%/yr vs 0.85%/yr for TMFG.

Performance

GABF vs. TMFG - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Gabelli Financial Services Opportunities ETF (GABF) and Motley Fool Global Opportunities ETF (TMFG). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, GABF achieves a -7.03% return, which is significantly lower than TMFG's 1.99% return.

GABF

• 1D: -1.89%
• 1M: -3.11%
• YTD: -7.03%
• 6M: -6.24%
• 1Y: -3.20%
• 3Y*: 20.47%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

TMFG

• 1D: -0.39%
• 1M: -0.08%
• YTD: 1.99%
• 6M: 2.14%
• 1Y: 3.83%
• 3Y*: 12.53%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

GABF vs. TMFG - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
GABF Gabelli Financial Services Opportunities ETF	-7.03%	3.60%	44.38%	38.92%	0.40%
TMFG Motley Fool Global Opportunities ETF	1.99%	6.75%	15.45%	28.36%	-2.61%

Correlation

The correlation between GABF and TMFG is 0.67, 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	0.67
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.69
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 11, 2022	0.75

The correlation between GABF and TMFG has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.67 to 0.75 - a consistent structural relationship.

GABF vs. TMFG - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	GABF	TMFG
Financial Services	84.6%	18.2%
Real Estate	6.0%	8.8%
Technology	4.9%	12.0%
Industrials	4.6%	21.4%
Basic Materials	-	1.8%
Communication Services	-	14.3%
Consumer Cyclical	-	11.9%
Consumer Defensive	-	5.9%
Energy	-	-
Healthcare	-	5.6%
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

GABF vs. TMFG — Risk / Return Rank

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

GABF

GABF Risk / Return Rank: 7
GABF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7
GABF Sortino Ratio Rank: 6
GABF Omega Ratio Rank: 6
GABF Calmar Ratio Rank: 7
GABF Martin Ratio Rank: 7

TMFG

TMFG Risk / Return Rank: 13
TMFG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 13
TMFG Sortino Ratio Rank: 12
TMFG Omega Ratio Rank: 12
TMFG Calmar Ratio Rank: 13
TMFG Martin Ratio Rank: 14

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.

GABF vs. TMFG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Gabelli Financial Services Opportunities ETF (GABF) and Motley Fool Global Opportunities ETF (TMFG). 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.

	GABF	TMFG	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.19	0.30	-0.48
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-0.13	0.51	-0.64
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.98	1.06	-0.08
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.19	0.33	-0.51
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-0.44	1.10	-1.55
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

GABF vs. TMFG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current GABF Sharpe Ratio is -0.19, which is lower than the TMFG Sharpe Ratio of 0.30. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of GABF and TMFG, 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

	GABF	TMFG	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.19	0.30	-0.48
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.87	0.20	+0.67

Drawdowns

GABF vs. TMFG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GABF drawdown since its inception was -20.86%, smaller than the maximum TMFG drawdown of -33.66%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GABF and TMFG.

Drawdown Indicators

	GABF	TMFG	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-20.86%	-33.66%	+12.80%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-17.16%	-11.81%	-5.35%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-20.86%	-16.60%	-4.26%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-11.60%	-1.16%	-10.44%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-4.86%	-10.49%	+5.63%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	7.27%	3.48%	+3.79%

Volatility

GABF vs. TMFG - Volatility Comparison

Gabelli Financial Services Opportunities ETF (GABF) has a higher volatility of 4.28% compared to Motley Fool Global Opportunities ETF (TMFG) at 2.64%. This indicates that GABF's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than TMFG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	GABF	TMFG	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.28%	2.64%	+1.64%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	13.14%	10.07%	+3.07%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	17.37%	13.03%	+4.34%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	20.54%	18.60%	+1.94%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	20.54%	18.60%	+1.94%

GABF vs. TMFG - Expense Ratio Comparison

GABF has a 0.10% expense ratio, which is lower than TMFG's 0.85% expense ratio.

Dividends

GABF vs. TMFG - Dividend Comparison

GABF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.11%, more than TMFG's 0.26% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022
GABF Gabelli Financial Services Opportunities ETF	2.11%	1.96%	4.19%	4.95%	1.31%
TMFG Motley Fool Global Opportunities ETF	0.26%	0.27%	13.94%	5.42%	0.70%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both GABF and TMFG in my portfolio?

GABF and TMFG have a correlation of 0.67, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, GABF or TMFG?

GABF has higher volatility (4.28%) compared to TMFG (2.64%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GABF dropped -20.86% vs TMFG's -33.66%.

Which ETF is better, GABF or TMFG?

On 3-year performance, GABF leads with 20.47% vs 12.53% for TMFG. On fees, GABF is cheaper at 0.10% per year. On volatility, TMFG has been the lower-risk option at 2.64%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, GABF or TMFG?

Over the 3-year period, GABF has performed better with a 20.47% return vs 12.53%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, GABF or TMFG?

GABF is cheaper with a 0.10% expense ratio, compared with 0.85% for TMFG.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, GABF or TMFG?

GABF has the higher dividend yield at 2.11%, compared with 0.26% for TMFG.

What is the main difference between GABF and TMFG?

GABF is categorized as Financials Equities, while TMFG is Global Equities. They also come from different issuers: Gabelli and Motley Fool. Their fees differ too: 0.10% for GABF and 0.85% for TMFG.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

TMFG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.30 vs -0.19), 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.