PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
RUNN vs. VFMO
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

RUNN vs. VFMO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Running Oak Efficient Growth ETF (RUNN) and Vanguard U.S. Momentum Factor ETF (VFMO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, RUNN achieves a -2.05% return, which is significantly lower than VFMO's 24.71% return.


RUNN

1D
0.98%
1M
-0.71%
YTD
-2.05%
6M
-2.63%
1Y
-0.93%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*

VFMO

1D
0.84%
1M
4.64%
YTD
24.71%
6M
22.49%
1Y
44.76%
3Y*
28.43%
5Y*
14.03%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

RUNN vs. VFMO - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023
RUNN
Running Oak Efficient Growth ETF
-2.05%2.30%17.16%12.05%
VFMO
Vanguard U.S. Momentum Factor ETF
24.71%17.39%26.14%12.64%

Correlation

The correlation between RUNN and VFMO is 0.55, 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

0.55

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 9, 2023

0.71

The correlation between RUNN and VFMO shifts across timeframes, from 0.55 (1 year) to 0.71 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

RUNN vs. VFMO - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
RUNN
VFMO

Industrials

39.4%
24.7%

Technology

17.8%
17.5%

Healthcare

13.3%
22.9%

Financial Services

12.8%
6.5%

Consumer Cyclical

8.3%
8.7%

Communication Services

2.1%
3.4%

Basic Materials

2.0%
6.4%

Consumer Defensive

-

2.5%

Energy

-

7.3%

Real Estate

-

0.1%

Utilities

-

0.2%

Industrials

RUNN
39.4%
VFMO
24.7%

Technology

RUNN
17.8%
VFMO
17.5%

Healthcare

RUNN
13.3%
VFMO
22.9%

Financial Services

RUNN
12.8%
VFMO
6.5%

Consumer Cyclical

RUNN
8.3%
VFMO
8.7%

Communication Services

RUNN
2.1%
VFMO
3.4%

Basic Materials

RUNN
2.0%
VFMO
6.4%

Consumer Defensive

RUNN

-

VFMO
2.5%

Energy

RUNN

-

VFMO
7.3%

Real Estate

RUNN

-

VFMO
0.1%

Utilities

RUNN

-

VFMO
0.2%

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

RUNN vs. VFMO — Risk / Return Rank

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

RUNN
RUNN Risk / Return Rank: 88
Overall Rank
RUNN Sharpe Ratio Rank: 88
Sharpe Ratio Rank
RUNN Sortino Ratio Rank: 88
Sortino Ratio Rank
RUNN Omega Ratio Rank: 88
Omega Ratio Rank
RUNN Calmar Ratio Rank: 88
Calmar Ratio Rank
RUNN Martin Ratio Rank: 88
Martin Ratio Rank

VFMO
VFMO Risk / Return Rank: 6969
Overall Rank
VFMO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6565
Sharpe Ratio Rank
VFMO Sortino Ratio Rank: 6060
Sortino Ratio Rank
VFMO Omega Ratio Rank: 6060
Omega Ratio Rank
VFMO Calmar Ratio Rank: 8080
Calmar Ratio Rank
VFMO Martin Ratio Rank: 8080
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.

RUNN vs. VFMO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Running Oak Efficient Growth ETF (RUNN) and Vanguard U.S. Momentum Factor ETF (VFMO). 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.


RUNNVFMODifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-2.19

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-2.78

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.00

1.36

-0.36

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

-0.09

4.09

-4.18

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

-0.21

15.46

-15.68

RUNN vs. VFMO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RUNN Sharpe Ratio is -0.07, which is lower than the VFMO Sharpe Ratio of 2.12. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RUNN and VFMO, 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


RUNNVFMODifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

-0.07

2.12

-2.19

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.65

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.70

0.66

+0.04

Drawdowns

RUNN vs. VFMO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RUNN drawdown since its inception was -16.83%, smaller than the maximum VFMO drawdown of -36.77%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RUNN and VFMO.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


RUNNVFMODifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-16.83%

-36.77%

+19.94%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-10.34%

-10.98%

+0.64%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-24.40%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-25.80%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-6.99%

0.00%

-6.99%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-3.54%

-7.76%

+4.22%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

4.36%

2.90%

+1.46%

Volatility

RUNN vs. VFMO - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Running Oak Efficient Growth ETF (RUNN) is 3.69%, while Vanguard U.S. Momentum Factor ETF (VFMO) has a volatility of 6.05%. This indicates that RUNN experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than VFMO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


RUNNVFMODifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.69%

6.05%

-2.36%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

9.75%

16.38%

-6.63%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

12.87%

21.21%

-8.34%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

13.81%

21.70%

-7.89%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

13.81%

23.56%

-9.75%

RUNN vs. VFMO - Expense Ratio Comparison

RUNN has a 0.58% expense ratio, which is higher than VFMO's 0.13% expense ratio.


Dividends

RUNN vs. VFMO - Dividend Comparison

RUNN's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.57%, less than VFMO's 0.62% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018
RUNN
Running Oak Efficient Growth ETF
0.57%0.55%0.39%0.33%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
VFMO
Vanguard U.S. Momentum Factor ETF
0.62%0.82%0.72%0.89%1.72%0.81%0.45%1.22%0.70%

Frequently Asked Questions


RUNN and VFMO have a correlation of 0.55, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

VFMO has higher volatility (6.05%) compared to RUNN (3.69%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RUNN dropped -16.83% vs VFMO's -36.77%.

On 1-year performance, VFMO leads with 44.76% vs -0.93% for RUNN. On fees, VFMO is cheaper at 0.13% per year. On volatility, RUNN has been the lower-risk option at 3.69%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, VFMO has performed better with a 44.76% return vs -0.93%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

VFMO is cheaper with a 0.13% expense ratio, compared with 0.58% for RUNN.

VFMO has the higher dividend yield at 0.62%, compared with 0.57% for RUNN.

RUNN is categorized as Mid Cap Blend Equities, while VFMO is Momentum. They also come from different issuers: Running Oak Capital and Vanguard. Their fees differ too: 0.58% for RUNN and 0.13% for VFMO.

VFMO currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.12 vs -0.07), 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 RUNN and VFMO

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