MFIG vs. ENFR
MFIG (Motley Fool Innovative Growth Factor ETF) and ENFR (Alerian Energy Infrastructure ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - MFIG is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund tracking the Motley Fool Innovative Growth Index, while ENFR is a Energy Equities fund tracking the Alerian Midstream Energy Select Index. Both are passively managed. At a correlation of -0.27, they often move in opposite directions. MFIG charges 0.50%/yr vs 0.35%/yr for ENFR.
Performance
MFIG vs. ENFR - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, MFIG achieves a -0.33% return, which is significantly lower than ENFR's 24.93% return.
MFIG
- 1D
- -0.81%
- 1M
- -2.41%
- YTD
- -0.33%
- 6M
- -1.71%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
ENFR
- 1D
- 1.51%
- 1M
- -4.52%
- YTD
- 24.93%
- 6M
- 25.03%
- 1Y
- 27.76%
- 3Y*
- 28.90%
- 5Y*
- 20.07%
- 10Y*
- 11.98%
MFIG vs. ENFR - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
MFIG Motley Fool Innovative Growth Factor ETF | -0.33% | -0.09% |
ENFR Alerian Energy Infrastructure ETF | 24.93% | -0.77% |
Correlation
The correlation between MFIG and ENFR is -0.27, 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 | -0.27 |
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. ENFR — Risk / Return Rank
MFIG
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
ENFR
MFIG vs. ENFR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Motley Fool Innovative Growth Factor ETF (MFIG) and Alerian Energy Infrastructure ETF (ENFR). 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.
| MFIG | ENFR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | — | 1.32 | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | — | 3.23 | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | — | 8.24 | — |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
MFIG vs. ENFR - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum MFIG drawdown since its inception was -14.29%, smaller than the maximum ENFR drawdown of -68.28%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MFIG and ENFR.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| MFIG | ENFR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -14.29% | -68.28% | +53.99% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | — | -8.64% | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -15.58% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -20.29% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -62.64% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -6.50% | -4.71% | -1.79% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -4.61% | -15.94% | +11.33% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | — | 3.38% | — |
Volatility
MFIG vs. ENFR - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| MFIG | ENFR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | — | 5.69% | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | — | 11.60% | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 17.10% | 14.86% | +2.24% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 17.10% | 19.25% | -2.15% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 17.10% | 24.68% | -7.58% |
MFIG vs. ENFR - Expense Ratio Comparison
MFIG has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is higher than ENFR's 0.35% expense ratio.
Dividends
MFIG vs. ENFR - Dividend Comparison
MFIG has not paid dividends to shareholders, while ENFR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.02%.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ENFR Alerian Energy Infrastructure ETF | 4.02% | 4.77% | 4.41% | 5.48% | 5.23% | 7.86% | 7.57% | 5.81% | 3.98% | 2.98% | 3.31% | 3.34% |
MFIG Motley Fool Innovative Growth Factor ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
MFIG and ENFR have a correlation of -0.27, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, ENFR is cheaper at 0.35% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
ENFR is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.50% for MFIG.
ENFR has the higher dividend yield at 4.02%, compared with 0.00% for MFIG.
MFIG is categorized as Large Cap Growth Equities, while ENFR is Energy Equities. MFIG tracks Motley Fool Innovative Growth Index, while ENFR tracks Alerian Midstream Energy Select Index. They also come from different issuers: Motley Fool and SS&C. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for MFIG and 0.35% for ENFR.
Find the right allocation for MFIG and ENFR
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