PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
MGV vs. FUNL
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

MGV vs. FUNL - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Vanguard Mega Cap Value ETF (MGV) and CornerCap Fundametrics Large-Cap ETF FUNL (FUNL). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, MGV achieves a 14.01% return, which is significantly higher than FUNL's 5.66% return.


MGV

1D
0.77%
1M
4.80%
YTD
14.01%
6M
14.90%
1Y
28.63%
3Y*
19.33%
5Y*
12.10%
10Y*
12.84%

FUNL

1D
0.00%
1M
0.00%
YTD
5.66%
6M
7.31%
1Y
19.19%
3Y*
16.61%
5Y*
9.42%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

MGV vs. FUNL - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020
MGV
Vanguard Mega Cap Value ETF
14.01%15.45%16.94%9.16%-1.22%25.93%13.71%
FUNL
CornerCap Fundametrics Large-Cap ETF FUNL
5.66%14.62%15.55%14.33%-5.76%25.93%14.92%

Correlation

The correlation between MGV and FUNL is 0.74, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.


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

0.74

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

0.86

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

0.90

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 21, 2020

0.91

The correlation between MGV and FUNL shifts across timeframes, from 0.74 (1 year) to 0.91 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

MGV vs. FUNL - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
MGV
FUNL

Financial Services

23.9%
19.3%

Healthcare

16.6%
15.3%

Technology

14.2%
14.6%

Industrials

13.7%
11.5%

Consumer Defensive

11.9%
7.0%

Energy

6.6%
7.6%

Consumer Cyclical

3.7%
6.5%

Communication Services

3.4%
5.8%

Utilities

2.6%
5.0%

Basic Materials

2.4%
2.2%

Real Estate

1.2%
4.5%

Financial Services

MGV
23.9%
FUNL
19.3%

Healthcare

MGV
16.6%
FUNL
15.3%

Technology

MGV
14.2%
FUNL
14.6%

Industrials

MGV
13.7%
FUNL
11.5%

Consumer Defensive

MGV
11.9%
FUNL
7.0%

Energy

MGV
6.6%
FUNL
7.6%

Consumer Cyclical

MGV
3.7%
FUNL
6.5%

Communication Services

MGV
3.4%
FUNL
5.8%

Utilities

MGV
2.6%
FUNL
5.0%

Basic Materials

MGV
2.4%
FUNL
2.2%

Real Estate

MGV
1.2%
FUNL
4.5%

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

MGV vs. FUNL — Risk / Return Rank

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

MGV
MGV Risk / Return Rank: 8787
Overall Rank
MGV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8888
Sharpe Ratio Rank
MGV Sortino Ratio Rank: 9090
Sortino Ratio Rank
MGV Omega Ratio Rank: 8787
Omega Ratio Rank
MGV Calmar Ratio Rank: 8484
Calmar Ratio Rank
MGV Martin Ratio Rank: 8484
Martin Ratio Rank

FUNL
FUNL Risk / Return Rank: 8181
Overall Rank
FUNL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6868
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FUNL Sortino Ratio Rank: 7474
Sortino Ratio Rank
FUNL Omega Ratio Rank: 8181
Omega Ratio Rank
FUNL Calmar Ratio Rank: 8888
Calmar Ratio Rank
FUNL Martin Ratio Rank: 9292
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.

MGV vs. FUNL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Vanguard Mega Cap Value ETF (MGV) and CornerCap Fundametrics Large-Cap ETF FUNL (FUNL). 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.


MGVFUNLDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.71

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.86

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.53

1.48

+0.05

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

4.48

5.07

-0.59

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

17.05

23.58

-6.52

MGV vs. FUNL - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MGV Sharpe Ratio is 2.93, which is higher than the FUNL Sharpe Ratio of 2.21. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MGV and FUNL, 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


MGVFUNLDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.93

2.21

+0.71

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.90

0.63

+0.27

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.79

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.48

0.95

-0.47

Drawdowns

MGV vs. FUNL - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MGV drawdown since its inception was -55.87%, which is greater than FUNL's maximum drawdown of -19.35%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MGV and FUNL.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


MGVFUNLDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-55.87%

-19.35%

-36.52%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-6.42%

-3.83%

-2.59%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-13.18%

-17.37%

+4.19%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-16.54%

-19.35%

+2.81%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-35.41%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

0.00%

-0.12%

+0.12%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-7.69%

-3.53%

-4.16%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.68%

0.82%

+0.86%

Volatility

MGV vs. FUNL - Volatility Comparison

Vanguard Mega Cap Value ETF (MGV) has a higher volatility of 2.37% compared to CornerCap Fundametrics Large-Cap ETF FUNL (FUNL) at 0.00%. This indicates that MGV's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FUNL based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


MGVFUNLDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

2.37%

0.00%

+2.37%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

7.49%

5.21%

+2.28%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

9.85%

8.79%

+1.06%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

13.57%

15.15%

-1.58%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

16.33%

15.29%

+1.04%

MGV vs. FUNL - Expense Ratio Comparison

MGV has a 0.05% expense ratio, which is lower than FUNL's 0.50% expense ratio.


Dividends

MGV vs. FUNL - Dividend Comparison

MGV's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.87%, less than FUNL's 2.25% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
FUNL
CornerCap Fundametrics Large-Cap ETF FUNL
2.25%2.10%1.78%1.69%1.84%1.55%0.45%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
MGV
Vanguard Mega Cap Value ETF
1.87%2.04%2.31%2.48%2.45%2.17%2.47%2.69%2.65%2.34%2.53%2.59%

Frequently Asked Questions


MGV and FUNL have a correlation of 0.74, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

MGV has higher volatility (2.37%) compared to FUNL (0.00%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MGV dropped -55.87% vs FUNL's -19.35%.

On 5-year performance, MGV leads with 12.10% vs 9.42% for FUNL. On fees, MGV is cheaper at 0.05% per year. On volatility, FUNL has been the lower-risk option at 0.00%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 5-year period, MGV has performed better with a 12.10% return vs 9.42%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

MGV is cheaper with a 0.05% expense ratio, compared with 0.50% for FUNL.

FUNL has the higher dividend yield at 2.25%, compared with 1.87% for MGV.

They also come from different issuers: Vanguard and CornerCap. Their fees differ too: 0.05% for MGV and 0.50% for FUNL.

MGV currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.93 vs 2.21), 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 MGV and FUNL

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