MBCC vs. CNAV
MBCC (Monarch Blue Chips Core Index ETF) and CNAV (Mohr Company Nav ETF) are both Large Cap Blend Equities funds. MBCC is passively managed, while CNAV is actively managed. MBCC charges 1.14%/yr vs 1.31%/yr for CNAV.
Performance
MBCC vs. CNAV - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
MBCC
- 1D
- 0.00%
- 1M
- 0.00%
- 6M
- —
- YTD
- —
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
CNAV
- 1D
- -4.55%
- 1M
- 0.84%
- 6M
- 30.20%
- YTD
- 35.28%
- 1Y
- 53.71%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
MBCC vs. CNAV - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | |
|---|---|
MBCC Monarch Blue Chips Core Index ETF | 0.00% |
CNAV Mohr Company Nav ETF | -7.11% |
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
MBCC vs. CNAV — Risk / Return Rank
MBCC
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
CNAV
MBCC vs. CNAV - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Monarch Blue Chips Core Index ETF (MBCC) and Mohr Company Nav ETF (CNAV). 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.
| MBCC | CNAV | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | — | 1.31 | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | — | 4.08 | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | — | 15.00 | — |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
MBCC vs. CNAV - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum MBCC drawdown since its inception was 0.00%, smaller than the maximum CNAV drawdown of -30.06%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MBCC and CNAV.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| MBCC | CNAV | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | 0.00% | -30.06% | +30.06% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | — | -13.24% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | 0.00% | -13.24% | +13.24% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | 0.00% | -5.41% | +5.41% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | — | 3.59% | — |
Volatility
MBCC vs. CNAV - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| MBCC | CNAV | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | — | 20.03% | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | — | 28.61% | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.00% | 31.47% | -31.47% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 0.00% | 30.29% | -30.29% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 0.00% | 30.29% | -30.29% |
MBCC vs. CNAV - Expense Ratio Comparison
MBCC has a 1.14% expense ratio, which is lower than CNAV's 1.31% expense ratio.
Dividends
MBCC vs. CNAV - Dividend Comparison
Neither MBCC nor CNAV has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
On fees, MBCC is cheaper at 1.14% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
MBCC is cheaper with a 1.14% expense ratio, compared with 1.31% for CNAV.
MBCC and CNAV have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.
They also come from different issuers: Monarch and Mohr. Their fees differ too: 1.14% for MBCC and 1.31% for CNAV.
Find the right allocation for MBCC and CNAV
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