PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
MFVL vs. LVDS
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

MFVL vs. LVDS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Motley Fool Value Factor ETF (MFVL) and JPMorgan Fundamental Data Science Large Value ETF (LVDS). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, MFVL achieves a 0.39% return, which is significantly lower than LVDS's 13.56% return.


MFVL

1D
-1.06%
1M
0.90%
YTD
0.39%
6M
1Y
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*

LVDS

1D
0.18%
1M
3.85%
YTD
13.56%
6M
14.52%
1Y
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

MFVL vs. LVDS - Yearly Performance Comparison


Correlation

The correlation between MFVL and LVDS is 0.50, 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

0.50

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

MFVL vs. LVDS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Motley Fool Value Factor ETF (MFVL) and JPMorgan Fundamental Data Science Large Value ETF (LVDS). 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.

MFVL vs. LVDS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


MFVLLVDSDifference

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.31

2.39

-2.07

Drawdowns

MFVL vs. LVDS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MFVL drawdown since its inception was -7.03%, which is greater than LVDS's maximum drawdown of -6.64%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MFVL and LVDS.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


MFVLLVDSDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-7.03%

-6.64%

-0.39%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-3.29%

0.00%

-3.29%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-2.42%

-0.98%

-1.44%

Volatility

MFVL vs. LVDS - Volatility Comparison


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


MFVLLVDSDifference

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

12.15%

10.43%

+1.72%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

12.15%

10.43%

+1.72%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

12.15%

10.43%

+1.72%

MFVL vs. LVDS - Expense Ratio Comparison

MFVL has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is higher than LVDS's 0.30% expense ratio.


Dividends

MFVL vs. LVDS - Dividend Comparison

MFVL has not paid dividends to shareholders, while LVDS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 7.56%.


Frequently Asked Questions


MFVL and LVDS have a correlation of 0.50, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, LVDS is cheaper at 0.30% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

LVDS is cheaper with a 0.30% expense ratio, compared with 0.50% for MFVL.

LVDS has the higher dividend yield at 7.56%, compared with 0.00% for MFVL.

They also come from different issuers: Motley Fool and JPMorgan. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for MFVL and 0.30% for LVDS.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for MFVL and LVDS

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