TBFG vs. MOOD

Last updated Jun 3, 2026

TBFG (The Brinsmere Fund - Growth ETF) and MOOD (Relative Sentiment Tactical Allocation ETF) are both Tactical Allocation funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, TBFG returned 25.22% vs 36.84% for MOOD. Their correlation of 0.84 suggests significant overlap in exposure. TBFG charges 0.42%/yr vs 0.68%/yr for MOOD.

Performance

TBFG vs. MOOD - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in The Brinsmere Fund - Growth ETF (TBFG) and Relative Sentiment Tactical Allocation ETF (MOOD). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, TBFG achieves a 10.75% return, which is significantly lower than MOOD's 15.06% return.

TBFG

• 1D: 0.50%
• 1M: 4.16%
• YTD: 10.75%
• 6M: 11.92%
• 1Y: 25.22%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

MOOD

• 1D: 0.36%
• 1M: 3.72%
• YTD: 15.06%
• 6M: 17.79%
• 1Y: 36.84%
• 3Y*: 20.81%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

TBFG vs. MOOD - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
TBFG The Brinsmere Fund - Growth ETF	10.75%	14.56%	10.48%
MOOD Relative Sentiment Tactical Allocation ETF	15.06%	30.39%	13.70%

Correlation

The correlation between TBFG and MOOD is 0.84, 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	0.84
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 17, 2024	0.84

The correlation between TBFG and MOOD has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.84 to 0.84 - a consistent structural relationship.

TBFG vs. MOOD - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	TBFG	MOOD
Technology	21.5%	27.6%
Financial Services	17.7%	15.7%
Industrials	13.3%	12.6%
Consumer Cyclical	8.4%	9.5%
Healthcare	8.3%	8.4%
Energy	7.0%	3.7%
Communication Services	6.0%	7.9%
Basic Materials	6.0%	4.4%
Consumer Defensive	5.8%	5.1%
Utilities	3.4%	2.7%
Real Estate	2.4%	2.5%

Return for Risk

TBFG vs. MOOD — Risk / Return Rank

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

TBFG

TBFG Risk / Return Rank: 76
TBFG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 79
TBFG Sortino Ratio Rank: 80
TBFG Omega Ratio Rank: 80
TBFG Calmar Ratio Rank: 66
TBFG Martin Ratio Rank: 75

MOOD

MOOD Risk / Return Rank: 75
MOOD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 80
MOOD Sortino Ratio Rank: 66
MOOD Omega Ratio Rank: 85
MOOD Calmar Ratio Rank: 77
MOOD Martin Ratio Rank: 66

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.

TBFG vs. MOOD - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for The Brinsmere Fund - Growth ETF (TBFG) and Relative Sentiment Tactical Allocation ETF (MOOD). 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	MOOD	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	2.61	2.63	-0.02
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	3.63	3.07	+0.57
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.49	1.52	-0.04
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.37	3.97	-0.60
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	14.61	12.33	+2.28
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

TBFG vs. MOOD - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current TBFG Sharpe Ratio is 2.61, which is comparable to the MOOD Sharpe Ratio of 2.63. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of TBFG and MOOD, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	TBFG	MOOD	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.61	2.63	-0.02
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.40	1.37	+0.03

Drawdowns

TBFG vs. MOOD - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum TBFG drawdown since its inception was -13.43%, smaller than the maximum MOOD drawdown of -14.34%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for TBFG and MOOD.

Drawdown Indicators

	TBFG	MOOD	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-13.43%	-14.34%	+0.91%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-7.63%	-9.71%	+2.08%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-9.71%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	-0.03%	+0.03%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.63%	-2.32%	+0.69%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.76%	3.12%	-1.36%

Volatility

TBFG vs. MOOD - Volatility Comparison

The Brinsmere Fund - Growth ETF (TBFG) and Relative Sentiment Tactical Allocation ETF (MOOD) have volatilities of 3.05% and 3.21%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	TBFG	MOOD	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.05%	3.21%	-0.16%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	8.00%	12.30%	-4.30%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	9.73%	14.13%	-4.40%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	10.96%	12.07%	-1.11%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	10.96%	12.07%	-1.11%

TBFG vs. MOOD - Expense Ratio Comparison

TBFG has a 0.42% expense ratio, which is lower than MOOD's 0.68% expense ratio.

Dividends

TBFG vs. MOOD - Dividend Comparison

TBFG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.34%, more than MOOD's 0.35% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022
MOOD Relative Sentiment Tactical Allocation ETF	0.35%	0.40%	1.33%	1.34%	1.43%
TBFG The Brinsmere Fund - Growth ETF	2.34%	2.65%	2.43%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both TBFG and MOOD in my portfolio?

TBFG and MOOD have a correlation of 0.84, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, TBFG or MOOD?

MOOD has higher volatility (3.21%) compared to TBFG (3.05%). In terms of maximum drawdown, TBFG dropped -13.43% vs MOOD's -14.34%.

Which ETF is better, TBFG or MOOD?

On 1-year performance, MOOD leads with 36.84% vs 25.22% for TBFG. On fees, TBFG is cheaper at 0.42% per year. On volatility, TBFG has been the lower-risk option at 3.05%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, TBFG or MOOD?

Over the 1-year period, MOOD has performed better with a 36.84% return vs 25.22%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, TBFG or MOOD?

TBFG is cheaper with a 0.42% expense ratio, compared with 0.68% for MOOD.

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

TBFG has the higher dividend yield at 2.34%, compared with 0.35% for MOOD.

What is the main difference between TBFG and MOOD?

They also come from different issuers: The Brinsmere Funds and Relative Sentiment. Their fees differ too: 0.42% for TBFG and 0.68% for MOOD.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

MOOD currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.63 vs 2.61), 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.