PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
MGC vs. MTUM
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

MGC vs. MTUM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Vanguard Mega Cap ETF (MGC) and iShares MSCI USA Momentum Factor ETF (MTUM). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, MGC achieves a 10.80% return, which is significantly lower than MTUM's 31.75% return. Over the past 10 years, MGC has underperformed MTUM with an annualized return of 16.36%, while MTUM has yielded a comparatively higher 17.31% annualized return.


MGC

1D
-0.79%
1M
5.59%
YTD
10.80%
6M
10.75%
1Y
29.68%
3Y*
23.87%
5Y*
14.70%
10Y*
16.36%

MTUM

1D
1.06%
1M
15.90%
YTD
31.75%
6M
32.38%
1Y
41.76%
3Y*
34.75%
5Y*
15.21%
10Y*
17.31%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

MGC vs. MTUM - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
MGC
Vanguard Mega Cap ETF
10.80%19.31%27.16%29.77%-19.95%27.58%21.57%31.14%-3.45%22.61%
MTUM
iShares MSCI USA Momentum Factor ETF
31.75%22.15%32.89%9.15%-18.27%13.36%29.86%27.25%-1.67%37.50%

Correlation

The correlation between MGC and MTUM is 0.83, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.83

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.88

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.86

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.86

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 19, 2013

0.86

The correlation between MGC and MTUM has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.83 to 0.88 - a consistent structural relationship.

MGC vs. MTUM - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
MGC
MTUM

Technology

39.3%
44.4%

Communication Services

13.1%
7.4%

Financial Services

11.7%
10.4%

Consumer Cyclical

10.1%
3.6%

Healthcare

8.9%
6.9%

Industrials

6.5%
15.6%

Consumer Defensive

4.8%
3.3%

Energy

2.6%
3.5%

Basic Materials

1.2%
1.7%

Utilities

1.0%
1.6%

Real Estate

1.0%
1.8%

Technology

MGC
39.3%
MTUM
44.4%

Communication Services

MGC
13.1%
MTUM
7.4%

Financial Services

MGC
11.7%
MTUM
10.4%

Consumer Cyclical

MGC
10.1%
MTUM
3.6%

Healthcare

MGC
8.9%
MTUM
6.9%

Industrials

MGC
6.5%
MTUM
15.6%

Consumer Defensive

MGC
4.8%
MTUM
3.3%

Energy

MGC
2.6%
MTUM
3.5%

Basic Materials

MGC
1.2%
MTUM
1.7%

Utilities

MGC
1.0%
MTUM
1.6%

Real Estate

MGC
1.0%
MTUM
1.8%

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

MGC vs. MTUM — Risk / Return Rank

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

MGC
MGC Risk / Return Rank: 6969
Overall Rank
MGC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7373
Sharpe Ratio Rank
MGC Sortino Ratio Rank: 7171
Sortino Ratio Rank
MGC Omega Ratio Rank: 7171
Omega Ratio Rank
MGC Calmar Ratio Rank: 6060
Calmar Ratio Rank
MGC Martin Ratio Rank: 7171
Martin Ratio Rank

MTUM
MTUM Risk / Return Rank: 6767
Overall Rank
MTUM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6464
Sharpe Ratio Rank
MTUM Sortino Ratio Rank: 6262
Sortino Ratio Rank
MTUM Omega Ratio Rank: 6363
Omega Ratio Rank
MTUM Calmar Ratio Rank: 7171
Calmar Ratio Rank
MTUM Martin Ratio Rank: 7575
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.

MGC vs. MTUM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Vanguard Mega Cap ETF (MGC) and iShares MSCI USA Momentum Factor ETF (MTUM). 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.


MGCMTUMDifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

2.42

2.20

+0.22

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

3.30

2.98

+0.32

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

1.43

1.39

+0.04

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

3.03

3.64

-0.61

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

13.61

14.50

-0.89

MGC vs. MTUM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MGC Sharpe Ratio is 2.42, which is comparable to the MTUM Sharpe Ratio of 2.20. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MGC and MTUM, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


MGCMTUMDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.42

2.20

+0.22

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.86

0.74

+0.11

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.90

0.83

+0.08

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.60

0.85

-0.25

Drawdowns

MGC vs. MTUM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MGC drawdown since its inception was -51.93%, which is greater than MTUM's maximum drawdown of -34.08%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MGC and MTUM.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


MGCMTUMDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-51.93%

-34.08%

-17.85%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-9.85%

-11.54%

+1.69%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-19.28%

-20.99%

+1.71%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-25.74%

-32.28%

+6.54%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-33.07%

-34.08%

+1.01%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.79%

0.00%

-0.79%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-7.06%

-6.21%

-0.85%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.19%

2.89%

-0.70%

Volatility

MGC vs. MTUM - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Vanguard Mega Cap ETF (MGC) is 3.04%, while iShares MSCI USA Momentum Factor ETF (MTUM) has a volatility of 7.68%. This indicates that MGC experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than MTUM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


MGCMTUMDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.04%

7.68%

-4.64%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

9.27%

16.46%

-7.19%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

12.32%

19.04%

-6.72%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

17.27%

20.60%

-3.33%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

18.21%

21.03%

-2.82%

MGC vs. MTUM - Expense Ratio Comparison

MGC has a 0.05% expense ratio, which is lower than MTUM's 0.15% expense ratio. Despite the difference, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.


Dividends

MGC vs. MTUM - Dividend Comparison

MGC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.87%, more than MTUM's 0.60% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
MGC
Vanguard Mega Cap ETF
0.87%0.93%1.15%1.35%1.65%1.17%1.45%1.81%2.10%1.83%2.14%2.11%
MTUM
iShares MSCI USA Momentum Factor ETF
0.60%0.91%0.75%1.35%1.80%0.55%0.83%1.48%1.27%1.02%1.43%1.12%

Frequently Asked Questions


MGC and MTUM have a correlation of 0.83, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

MTUM has higher volatility (7.68%) compared to MGC (3.04%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MGC dropped -51.93% vs MTUM's -34.08%.

On 10-year performance, MTUM leads with 17.31% vs 16.36% for MGC. On fees, MGC is cheaper at 0.05% per year. On volatility, MGC has been the lower-risk option at 3.04%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, MTUM has performed better with a 17.31% return vs 16.36%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

MGC is cheaper with a 0.05% expense ratio, compared with 0.15% for MTUM.

MGC has the higher dividend yield at 0.87%, compared with 0.60% for MTUM.

MGC is categorized as Large Cap Blend Equities, while MTUM is Momentum. MGC tracks CRSP US Mega Cap Index, while MTUM tracks MSCI USA Momentum SR Variant Index. They also come from different issuers: Vanguard and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.05% for MGC and 0.15% for MTUM.

MGC currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.42 vs 2.20), meaning it's delivered slightly more return per unit of risk over the trailing 12 months. However, this ranking shifts over time - use the Risk/Return Score above for a more comprehensive view that combines Sharpe, Sortino, and other measures used by quantitative funds.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for MGC and MTUM

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