PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
MFIG vs. EIPX
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

MFIG vs. EIPX - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Motley Fool Innovative Growth Factor ETF (MFIG) and FT Energy Income Partners Strategy ETF (EIPX). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, MFIG achieves a 0.49% return, which is significantly lower than EIPX's 19.71% return.


MFIG

1D
-1.38%
1M
-1.61%
YTD
0.49%
6M
-0.92%
1Y
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*

EIPX

1D
0.83%
1M
-4.15%
YTD
19.71%
6M
20.38%
1Y
24.65%
3Y*
20.84%
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

MFIG vs. EIPX - Yearly Performance Comparison


Correlation

The correlation between MFIG and EIPX is -0.19, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.


Correlation
Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 9, 2025

-0.19

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

MFIG vs. EIPX — Risk / Return Rank

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

MFIG

Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.


EIPX
EIPX Risk / Return Rank: 7575
Overall Rank
EIPX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7272
Sharpe Ratio Rank
EIPX Sortino Ratio Rank: 7474
Sortino Ratio Rank
EIPX Omega Ratio Rank: 6565
Omega Ratio Rank
EIPX Calmar Ratio Rank: 8787
Calmar Ratio Rank
EIPX Martin Ratio Rank: 8080
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.

MFIG vs. EIPX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Motley Fool Innovative Growth Factor ETF (MFIG) and FT Energy Income Partners Strategy ETF (EIPX). 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.


MFIGEIPXDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.37

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

4.79

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

14.89

MFIG vs. EIPX - Sharpe Ratio Comparison


Loading charts...

Drawdowns

MFIG vs. EIPX - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MFIG drawdown since its inception was -14.29%, smaller than the maximum EIPX drawdown of -15.43%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MFIG and EIPX.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


MFIGEIPXDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-14.29%

-15.43%

+1.14%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-5.17%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-15.43%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-5.73%

-4.38%

-1.35%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-4.59%

-2.28%

-2.31%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.67%

Volatility

MFIG vs. EIPX - Volatility Comparison


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


MFIGEIPXDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.41%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

8.42%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

17.12%

11.15%

+5.97%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

17.12%

15.02%

+2.10%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

17.12%

15.02%

+2.10%

MFIG vs. EIPX - Expense Ratio Comparison

MFIG has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is lower than EIPX's 0.95% expense ratio.


Dividends

MFIG vs. EIPX - Dividend Comparison

MFIG has not paid dividends to shareholders, while EIPX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.73%.


PositionTTM2025202420232022
EIPX
FT Energy Income Partners Strategy ETF
2.73%3.23%3.27%3.48%0.34%
MFIG
Motley Fool Innovative Growth Factor ETF
0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


MFIG and EIPX have a correlation of -0.19, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, MFIG is cheaper at 0.50% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

MFIG is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for EIPX.

EIPX has the higher dividend yield at 2.73%, compared with 0.00% for MFIG.

MFIG is categorized as Large Cap Growth Equities, while EIPX is Energy Equities. They also come from different issuers: Motley Fool and First Trust. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for MFIG and 0.95% for EIPX.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for MFIG and EIPX

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