RUNN vs. VFMO

Last updated Aug 4, 2026

RUNN (Running Oak Efficient Growth ETF) and VFMO (Vanguard U.S. Momentum Factor ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - RUNN is a Mid Cap Blend Equities fund actively managed by Running Oak, while VFMO is a Momentum fund actively managed by Vanguard. Both are actively managed. Over the past 3 years, RUNN returned 9.72%/yr vs 24.08%/yr for VFMO. Their 0.63 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. RUNN charges 0.58%/yr vs 0.13%/yr for VFMO.

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.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, RUNN achieves a 3.56% return, which is significantly lower than VFMO's 18.90% return.

RUNN

• 1D: 1.59%
• 1M: 3.78%
• 6M: -0.46%
• YTD: 3.56%
• 1Y: 3.30%
• 3Y*: 9.72%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 10.97%

VFMO

• 1D: 1.33%
• 1M: -4.02%
• 6M: 11.14%
• YTD: 18.90%
• 1Y: 32.82%
• 3Y*: 24.08%
• 5Y*: 13.20%
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 14.61%

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
RUNN Running Oak Efficient Growth ETF	$1.22M	$3.95M	$2.56M
VFMO Vanguard U.S. Momentum Factor ETF	$16.47M	$17.39M	$17.06M

RUNN vs. VFMO - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
RUNN Running Oak Efficient Growth ETF	3.56%	2.30%	17.16%	11.90%
VFMO Vanguard U.S. Momentum Factor ETF	18.90%	17.39%	26.14%	13.03%

Correlation

The correlation between RUNN and VFMO is 0.35, which is low. Their historical price movements had little consistent relationship.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.35
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history.	0.63
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 8, 2023	0.63

Over the past year, the correlation between RUNN and VFMO has dropped to 0.35 - well below their long-term average of 0.63, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

RUNN vs. VFMO - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	RUNN	VFMO
Industrials	36.0%	24.7%
Technology	19.6%	17.5%
Healthcare	13.3%	22.9%
Financial Services	12.8%	6.5%
Consumer Cyclical	8.3%	8.7%
Basic Materials	3.7%	6.4%
Communication Services	2.1%	3.4%
Consumer Defensive	-	2.5%
Energy	-	7.3%
Real Estate	-	0.1%
Utilities	-	0.2%

Return for Risk

RUNN vs. VFMO — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

RUNN

RUNN Risk / Return Rank: 15
RUNN Sharpe Ratio Rank: 16
RUNN Sortino Ratio Rank: 15
RUNN Omega Ratio Rank: 15
RUNN Calmar Ratio Rank: 16
RUNN Martin Ratio Rank: 15

VFMO

VFMO Risk / Return Rank: 60
VFMO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 56
VFMO Sortino Ratio Rank: 54
VFMO Omega Ratio Rank: 53
VFMO Calmar Ratio Rank: 66
VFMO Martin Ratio Rank: 70

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

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.

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.

	RUNN	VFMO	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.24	1.37	-1.13
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.46	1.91	-1.45
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.05	1.24	-0.19
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.32	2.36	-2.04
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	0.68	8.66	-7.99

RUNN vs. VFMO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RUNN Sharpe Ratio is 0.24, which is lower than the VFMO Sharpe Ratio of 1.37. 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.

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.

Drawdown Indicators

	RUNN	VFMO	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-16.83%	-36.77%	+19.94%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-10.34%	-13.97%	+3.63%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-16.83%	-24.40%	+7.57%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-25.80%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.66%	-9.15%	+7.49%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.68%	-7.71%	+4.03%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.90%	3.80%	+1.10%

Volatility

RUNN vs. VFMO - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Running Oak Efficient Growth ETF (RUNN) is 5.02%, while Vanguard U.S. Momentum Factor ETF (VFMO) has a volatility of 8.64%. 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.

Volatility by Period

	RUNN	VFMO	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.02%	8.64%	-3.62%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	10.52%	19.35%	-8.83%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	13.65%	24.05%	-10.40%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	13.92%	22.13%	-8.21%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	13.92%	23.73%	-9.81%

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 0.54%, less than VFMO's 0.62% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018
RUNN Running Oak Efficient Growth ETF	0.54%	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

Can I hold both RUNN and VFMO in my portfolio?

RUNN and VFMO have a correlation of 0.35, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, RUNN or VFMO?

VFMO has higher volatility (8.64%) compared to RUNN (5.02%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RUNN dropped -16.83% vs VFMO's -36.77%.

Which ETF is better, RUNN or VFMO?

On 3-year performance, VFMO leads with 24.08% vs 9.72% for RUNN. On fees, VFMO is cheaper at 0.13% per year. On volatility, RUNN has been the lower-risk option at 5.02%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, RUNN or VFMO?

Over the 3-year period, VFMO has performed better with a 24.08% return vs 9.72%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, RUNN or VFMO?

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

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, RUNN or VFMO?

VFMO has the higher dividend yield at 0.62%, compared with 0.54% for RUNN.

What is the main difference between RUNN and VFMO?

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

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

VFMO currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.37 vs 0.24), 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.