TBFG vs. AOM
TBFG (The Brinsmere Fund - Growth ETF) and AOM (iShares Core Moderate Allocation ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - TBFG is a Tactical Allocation fund actively managed by The Brinsmere Funds, while AOM is a Diversified Portfolio fund tracking the S&P Target Risk Moderate. TBFG is actively managed, while AOM is passively managed. Over the past year, TBFG returned 25.22% vs 15.19% for AOM. Their correlation of 0.90 suggests significant overlap in exposure. TBFG charges 0.42%/yr vs 0.25%/yr for AOM.
Performance
TBFG vs. AOM - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, TBFG achieves a 10.75% return, which is significantly higher than AOM's 5.49% return.
TBFG
- 1D
- 0.50%
- 1M
- 4.16%
- YTD
- 10.75%
- 6M
- 11.92%
- 1Y
- 25.22%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
AOM
- 1D
- 0.22%
- 1M
- 2.21%
- YTD
- 5.49%
- 6M
- 6.11%
- 1Y
- 15.19%
- 3Y*
- 11.04%
- 5Y*
- 5.00%
- 10Y*
- 6.27%
TBFG vs. AOM - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | |
|---|---|---|---|
TBFG The Brinsmere Fund - Growth ETF | 10.75% | 14.56% | 10.48% |
AOM iShares Core Moderate Allocation ETF | 5.49% | 13.28% | 9.18% |
Correlation
The correlation between TBFG and AOM is 0.92, 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 | 0.92 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 17, 2024 | 0.90 |
The correlation between TBFG and AOM has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.90 to 0.92 - a consistent structural relationship.
TBFG vs. AOM - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
TBFG
AOM
Technology
Financial Services
Industrials
Consumer Cyclical
Healthcare
Energy
Communication Services
Basic Materials
Consumer Defensive
Utilities
Real Estate
Technology
TBFG
AOM
Financial Services
TBFG
AOM
Industrials
TBFG
AOM
Consumer Cyclical
TBFG
AOM
Healthcare
TBFG
AOM
Energy
TBFG
AOM
Communication Services
TBFG
AOM
Basic Materials
TBFG
AOM
Consumer Defensive
TBFG
AOM
Utilities
TBFG
AOM
Real Estate
TBFG
AOM
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
TBFG vs. AOM — Risk / Return Rank
TBFG
AOM
TBFG vs. AOM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for The Brinsmere Fund - Growth ETF (TBFG) and iShares Core Moderate Allocation ETF (AOM). 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.
| TBFG | AOM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | 2.61 | 2.34 | +0.27 |
Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | 3.63 | 3.38 | +0.25 |
Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.49 | 1.44 | +0.05 |
Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.37 | 2.99 | +0.38 |
Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 14.61 | 13.07 | +1.54 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| TBFG | AOM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.61 | 2.34 | +0.27 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | — | 0.62 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | — | 0.79 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 1.40 | 0.70 | +0.71 |
Drawdowns
TBFG vs. AOM - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum TBFG drawdown since its inception was -13.43%, smaller than the maximum AOM drawdown of -19.96%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for TBFG and AOM.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| TBFG | AOM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -13.43% | -19.96% | +6.53% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -7.63% | -5.11% | -2.52% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -6.85% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -19.96% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -19.96% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -1.63% | -2.70% | +1.07% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.76% | 1.17% | +0.59% |
Volatility
TBFG vs. AOM - Volatility Comparison
The Brinsmere Fund - Growth ETF (TBFG) has a higher volatility of 3.05% compared to iShares Core Moderate Allocation ETF (AOM) at 2.15%. This indicates that TBFG's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than AOM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| TBFG | AOM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 3.05% | 2.15% | +0.90% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 8.00% | 5.21% | +2.79% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 9.73% | 6.53% | +3.20% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 10.96% | 8.14% | +2.82% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 10.96% | 7.93% | +3.03% |
TBFG vs. AOM - Expense Ratio Comparison
TBFG has a 0.42% expense ratio, which is higher than AOM's 0.25% expense ratio.
Dividends
TBFG vs. AOM - Dividend Comparison
TBFG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.34%, less than AOM's 2.97% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
AOM iShares Core Moderate Allocation ETF | 2.97% | 2.98% | 3.10% | 2.79% | 2.27% | 1.56% | 2.02% | 2.66% | 2.53% | 3.31% | 2.14% | 1.98% |
TBFG The Brinsmere Fund - Growth ETF | 2.34% | 2.65% | 2.43% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
With a correlation of 0.92, TBFG and AOM move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.
TBFG has higher volatility (3.05%) compared to AOM (2.15%). In terms of maximum drawdown, TBFG dropped -13.43% vs AOM's -19.96%.
On 1-year performance, TBFG leads with 25.22% vs 15.19% for AOM. On fees, AOM is cheaper at 0.25% per year. On volatility, AOM has been the lower-risk option at 2.15%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, TBFG has performed better with a 25.22% return vs 15.19%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
AOM is cheaper with a 0.25% expense ratio, compared with 0.42% for TBFG.
AOM has the higher dividend yield at 2.97%, compared with 2.34% for TBFG.
TBFG is categorized as Tactical Allocation, while AOM is Diversified Portfolio. They also come from different issuers: The Brinsmere Funds and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.42% for TBFG and 0.25% for AOM.
TBFG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.61 vs 2.34), 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.
Find the right allocation for TBFG and AOM
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