MFVL vs. TMFS
MFVL (Motley Fool Value Factor ETF) and TMFS (Motley Fool Small-Cap Growth ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - MFVL is a Large Cap Value Equities fund actively managed by Motley Fool, while TMFS is a Small Cap Growth Equities fund actively managed by Motley Fool. Both are actively managed. A 0.61 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. MFVL charges 0.50%/yr vs 0.85%/yr for TMFS.
Performance
MFVL vs. TMFS - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, MFVL achieves a 1.60% return, which is significantly lower than TMFS's 2.70% return.
MFVL
- 1D
- 0.55%
- 1M
- 1.89%
- 6M
- -0.41%
- YTD
- 1.60%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
TMFS
- 1D
- -0.72%
- 1M
- 2.98%
- 6M
- -2.83%
- YTD
- 2.70%
- 1Y
- 1.16%
- 3Y*
- 7.30%
- 5Y*
- -1.54%
- 10Y*
- —
MFVL vs. TMFS - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
MFVL Motley Fool Value Factor ETF | 1.60% | 1.22% |
TMFS Motley Fool Small-Cap Growth ETF | 2.70% | -0.83% |
Correlation
The correlation between MFVL and TMFS is 0.61, 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 9, 2025 | 0.61 |
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. TMFS — Risk / Return Rank
MFVL
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
TMFS
MFVL vs. TMFS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Motley Fool Value Factor ETF (MFVL) 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.
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.
| MFVL | TMFS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | — | 1.01 | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | — | -0.06 | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | — | -0.17 | — |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
MFVL vs. TMFS - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum MFVL drawdown since its inception was -7.03%, smaller than the maximum TMFS drawdown of -48.79%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MFVL and TMFS.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| MFVL | TMFS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -7.03% | -48.79% | +41.76% |
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 | -2.12% | -16.79% | +14.67% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -2.67% | -19.45% | +16.78% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | — | 5.78% | — |
Volatility
MFVL vs. TMFS - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| MFVL | TMFS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | — | 5.29% | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | — | 14.15% | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 12.64% | 19.97% | -7.33% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 12.64% | 23.04% | -10.40% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 12.64% | 25.45% | -12.81% |
MFVL vs. TMFS - Expense Ratio Comparison
MFVL has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is lower than TMFS's 0.85% expense ratio.
Dividends
MFVL vs. TMFS - Dividend Comparison
Neither MFVL nor TMFS has paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
MFVL Motley Fool Value 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
MFVL and TMFS have a correlation of 0.61, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, MFVL is cheaper at 0.50% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
MFVL is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.85% for TMFS.
MFVL and TMFS have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.
MFVL is categorized as Large Cap Value Equities, while TMFS is Small Cap Growth Equities. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for MFVL and 0.85% for TMFS.
Find the right allocation for MFVL 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