TBFG vs. MATE

Last updated Aug 4, 2026

TBFG (The Brinsmere Fund - Growth ETF) and MATE (Man Active Trend Enhanced ETF) are both Tactical Allocation funds. Both are actively managed. Their correlation of 0.85 means they have usually moved in the same direction. TBFG charges 0.42%/yr vs 0.97%/yr for MATE.

Performance

TBFG vs. MATE - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in The Brinsmere Fund - Growth ETF (TBFG) and Man Active Trend Enhanced ETF (MATE). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, TBFG achieves a 9.50% return, which is significantly lower than MATE's 17.81% return.

TBFG

• 1D: 0.68%
• 1M: 0.21%
• 6M: 5.88%
• YTD: 9.50%
• 1Y: 19.72%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 13.56%

MATE

• 1D: 0.86%
• 1M: 1.69%
• 6M: 8.49%
• YTD: 17.81%
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: —

*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)
MATE Man Active Trend Enhanced ETF	$90.69K	$212.59K	$176.45K
TBFG The Brinsmere Fund - Growth ETF	$89.67K	$50.96K	$145.54K

TBFG vs. MATE - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
TBFG The Brinsmere Fund - Growth ETF	9.50%	0.98%
MATE Man Active Trend Enhanced ETF	17.81%	2.65%

Correlation

The correlation between TBFG and MATE is 0.85, meaning they have usually moved in the same direction, including during past declines.

	Correlation
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 17, 2025	0.85

Return for Risk

TBFG vs. MATE — Risk / Return Rank

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

TBFG

TBFG Risk / Return Rank: 74
TBFG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 75
TBFG Sortino Ratio Rank: 74
TBFG Omega Ratio Rank: 75
TBFG Calmar Ratio Rank: 69
TBFG Martin Ratio Rank: 77

MATE

Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.

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.

TBFG vs. MATE - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for The Brinsmere Fund - Growth ETF (TBFG) and Man Active Trend Enhanced ETF (MATE). 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.

	TBFG	MATE	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.83	—	—
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.55	—	—
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.34	—	—
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.60	—	—
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	10.51	—	—

Drawdowns

TBFG vs. MATE - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum TBFG drawdown since its inception was -13.43%, roughly equal to the maximum MATE drawdown of -13.24%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for TBFG and MATE.

Drawdown Indicators

	TBFG	MATE	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-13.43%	-13.24%	-0.19%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-7.63%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.13%	-2.53%	+1.40%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.62%	-3.48%	+1.86%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.88%	—	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	TBFG	MATE	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.21%	—	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	9.21%	—	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	10.87%	22.40%	-11.53%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	11.14%	22.40%	-11.26%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	11.14%	22.40%	-11.26%

TBFG vs. MATE - Expense Ratio Comparison

TBFG has a 0.42% expense ratio, which is lower than MATE's 0.97% expense ratio.

Dividends

TBFG vs. MATE - Dividend Comparison

TBFG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.40%, while MATE has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024
MATE Man Active Trend Enhanced ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
TBFG The Brinsmere Fund - Growth ETF	2.40%	2.65%	2.43%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both TBFG and MATE in my portfolio?

TBFG and MATE have a correlation of 0.85, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, TBFG or MATE?

On fees, TBFG is cheaper at 0.42% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, TBFG or MATE?

TBFG is cheaper with a 0.42% expense ratio, compared with 0.97% for MATE.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, TBFG or MATE?

TBFG has the higher dividend yield at 2.40%, compared with 0.00% for MATE.

What is the main difference between TBFG and MATE?

They also come from different issuers: Brinsmere and Man Group. Their fees differ too: 0.42% for TBFG and 0.97% for MATE.