MFIG vs. TMFS
MFIG (Motley Fool Innovative Growth Factor ETF) and TMFS (Motley Fool Small-Cap Growth ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - MFIG is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund tracking the Motley Fool Innovative Growth Index, while TMFS is a Small Cap Growth Equities fund actively managed by Motley Fool. MFIG is passively managed, while TMFS is actively managed. A 0.65 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. MFIG charges 0.50%/yr vs 0.85%/yr for TMFS.
Performance
MFIG vs. TMFS - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, MFIG achieves a 4.31% return, which is significantly higher than TMFS's -4.69% return.
MFIG
- 1D
- -1.31%
- 1M
- 6.47%
- YTD
- 4.31%
- 6M
- —
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
TMFS
- 1D
- -1.11%
- 1M
- -3.92%
- YTD
- -4.69%
- 6M
- -6.04%
- 1Y
- -3.97%
- 3Y*
- 6.32%
- 5Y*
- -1.68%
- 10Y*
- —
MFIG vs. TMFS - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
MFIG Motley Fool Innovative Growth Factor ETF | 4.31% | -0.21% |
TMFS Motley Fool Small-Cap Growth ETF | -4.69% | -1.11% |
Correlation
The correlation between MFIG and TMFS is 0.65, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 10, 2025 | 0.65 |
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. TMFS — Risk / Return Rank
MFIG
TMFS
MFIG vs. TMFS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Motley Fool Innovative Growth Factor ETF (MFIG) and Motley Fool Small-Cap Growth ETF (TMFS). 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.
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| MFIG | TMFS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | — | -0.20 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | — | -0.07 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.53 | 0.32 | +0.21 |
Drawdowns
MFIG vs. TMFS - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum MFIG drawdown since its inception was -14.29%, smaller than the maximum TMFS drawdown of -48.79%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MFIG and TMFS.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| MFIG | TMFS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -14.29% | -48.79% | +34.50% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | — | -15.73% | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -27.05% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -45.68% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -2.15% | -22.78% | +20.63% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -4.63% | -19.47% | +14.84% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | — | 5.68% | — |
Volatility
MFIG vs. TMFS - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| MFIG | TMFS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | — | 5.23% | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | — | 13.98% | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 16.58% | 19.62% | -3.04% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 16.58% | 22.93% | -6.35% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 16.58% | 25.52% | -8.94% |
MFIG vs. TMFS - Expense Ratio Comparison
MFIG has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is lower than TMFS's 0.85% expense ratio.
Dividends
MFIG vs. TMFS - Dividend Comparison
Neither MFIG nor TMFS has paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
MFIG Motley Fool Innovative Growth Factor ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
TMFS Motley Fool Small-Cap Growth ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.34% | 2.37% | 5.57% | 2.65% |
Frequently Asked Questions
MFIG and TMFS have a correlation of 0.65, 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 0.85% for TMFS.
MFIG and TMFS have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.
MFIG is categorized as Large Cap Growth Equities, while TMFS is Small Cap Growth Equities. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for MFIG and 0.85% for TMFS.
Find the right allocation for MFIG and TMFS
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