PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
MAVF vs. ROE
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

MAVF vs. ROE - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Matrix Advisors Value ETF (MAVF) and Astoria US Equal Weight Quality Kings ETF (ROE). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, MAVF achieves a 12.63% return, which is significantly lower than ROE's 21.08% return.


MAVF

1D
1.31%
1M
3.75%
YTD
12.63%
6M
12.50%
1Y
35.78%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*

ROE

1D
0.09%
1M
6.88%
YTD
21.08%
6M
21.44%
1Y
38.24%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

MAVF vs. ROE - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)2025
MAVF
Matrix Advisors Value ETF
12.63%19.46%
ROE
Astoria US Equal Weight Quality Kings ETF
21.08%14.49%

Correlation

The correlation between MAVF and ROE is 0.81, 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

0.81

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 25, 2025

0.85

The correlation between MAVF and ROE has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.81 to 0.85 - a consistent structural relationship.

MAVF vs. ROE - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
MAVF
ROE

Financial Services

26.7%
11.7%

Technology

23.9%
36.1%

Communication Services

15.5%
10.6%

Consumer Cyclical

10.9%
9.4%

Industrials

8.4%
9.8%

Healthcare

7.9%
8.7%

Consumer Defensive

6.7%
4.7%

Basic Materials

-

1.8%

Energy

-

3.5%

Real Estate

-

1.9%

Utilities

-

1.9%

Financial Services

MAVF
26.7%
ROE
11.7%

Technology

MAVF
23.9%
ROE
36.1%

Communication Services

MAVF
15.5%
ROE
10.6%

Consumer Cyclical

MAVF
10.9%
ROE
9.4%

Industrials

MAVF
8.4%
ROE
9.8%

Healthcare

MAVF
7.9%
ROE
8.7%

Consumer Defensive

MAVF
6.7%
ROE
4.7%

Basic Materials

MAVF

-

ROE
1.8%

Energy

MAVF

-

ROE
3.5%

Real Estate

MAVF

-

ROE
1.9%

Utilities

MAVF

-

ROE
1.9%

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

MAVF vs. ROE — Risk / Return Rank

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

MAVF
MAVF Risk / Return Rank: 7575
Overall Rank
MAVF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8181
Sharpe Ratio Rank
MAVF Sortino Ratio Rank: 7979
Sortino Ratio Rank
MAVF Omega Ratio Rank: 7878
Omega Ratio Rank
MAVF Calmar Ratio Rank: 6767
Calmar Ratio Rank
MAVF Martin Ratio Rank: 7272
Martin Ratio Rank

ROE
ROE Risk / Return Rank: 8585
Overall Rank
ROE Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8585
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ROE Sortino Ratio Rank: 8484
Sortino Ratio Rank
ROE Omega Ratio Rank: 8181
Omega Ratio Rank
ROE Calmar Ratio Rank: 8484
Calmar Ratio Rank
ROE Martin Ratio Rank: 8989
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.

MAVF vs. ROE - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Matrix Advisors Value ETF (MAVF) and Astoria US Equal Weight Quality Kings ETF (ROE). 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.


MAVFROEDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.19

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.23

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.45

1.48

-0.03

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.28

4.44

-1.15

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

13.38

20.05

-6.67

MAVF vs. ROE - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MAVF Sharpe Ratio is 2.57, which is comparable to the ROE Sharpe Ratio of 2.76. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MAVF and ROE, 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


MAVFROEDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.57

2.76

-0.19

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

1.37

1.39

-0.02

Drawdowns

MAVF vs. ROE - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MAVF drawdown since its inception was -16.44%, smaller than the maximum ROE drawdown of -19.10%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MAVF and ROE.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


MAVFROEDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-16.44%

-19.10%

+2.66%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-10.94%

-8.66%

-2.28%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

0.00%

0.00%

0.00%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-2.41%

-2.58%

+0.17%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.68%

1.91%

+0.77%

Volatility

MAVF vs. ROE - Volatility Comparison

Matrix Advisors Value ETF (MAVF) and Astoria US Equal Weight Quality Kings ETF (ROE) have volatilities of 3.57% and 3.69%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


MAVFROEDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.57%

3.69%

-0.12%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

10.62%

10.65%

-0.03%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

13.98%

13.92%

+0.06%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

19.16%

15.77%

+3.39%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

19.16%

15.77%

+3.39%

MAVF vs. ROE - Expense Ratio Comparison

MAVF has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is higher than ROE's 0.49% expense ratio.


Dividends

MAVF vs. ROE - Dividend Comparison

MAVF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.38%, less than ROE's 0.94% yield.


PositionTTM202520242023
MAVF
Matrix Advisors Value ETF
0.38%0.42%0.00%0.00%
ROE
Astoria US Equal Weight Quality Kings ETF
0.94%0.97%1.18%0.68%

Frequently Asked Questions


MAVF and ROE have a correlation of 0.81, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

ROE has higher volatility (3.69%) compared to MAVF (3.57%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MAVF dropped -16.44% vs ROE's -19.10%.

On 1-year performance, ROE leads with 38.24% vs 35.78% for MAVF. On fees, ROE is cheaper at 0.49% per year. On volatility, MAVF has been the lower-risk option at 3.57%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, ROE has performed better with a 38.24% return vs 35.78%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

ROE is cheaper with a 0.49% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for MAVF.

ROE has the higher dividend yield at 0.94%, compared with 0.38% for MAVF.

They also come from different issuers: Matrix Asset Advisors and Astoria. Their fees differ too: 0.75% for MAVF and 0.49% for ROE.

ROE currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.76 vs 2.57), 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 MAVF and ROE

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