TMFC vs. STRV

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

TMFC (Motley Fool 100 Index ETF) and STRV (Strive 500 ETF) are both Large Cap Growth Equities funds - TMFC tracks the Motley Fool 100 Index while STRV tracks the Bloomberg US Large Cap Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, TMFC returned 26.20%/yr vs 22.74%/yr for STRV. Their correlation of 0.93 suggests significant overlap in exposure. TMFC charges 0.50%/yr vs 0.05%/yr for STRV.

Performance

TMFC vs. STRV - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Motley Fool 100 Index ETF (TMFC) and Strive 500 ETF (STRV). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, TMFC achieves a 8.44% return, which is significantly lower than STRV's 10.98% return.

TMFC

• 1D: -0.85%
• 1M: 4.54%
• YTD: 8.44%
• 6M: 8.14%
• 1Y: 25.76%
• 3Y*: 26.20%
• 5Y*: 15.96%
• 10Y*: —

STRV

• 1D: -0.67%
• 1M: 5.39%
• YTD: 10.98%
• 6M: 10.91%
• 1Y: 28.16%
• 3Y*: 22.74%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

TMFC vs. STRV - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
TMFC Motley Fool 100 Index ETF	8.44%	19.55%	35.17%	47.04%	-8.48%
STRV Strive 500 ETF	10.98%	17.95%	25.13%	27.70%	-1.96%

Correlation

The correlation between TMFC and STRV is 0.93, 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	0.93
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.93
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 16, 2022	0.93

The correlation between TMFC and STRV has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.93 to 0.93 - a consistent structural relationship.

TMFC vs. STRV - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	TMFC	STRV
Technology	41.4%	38.6%
Communication Services	17.4%	11.1%
Financial Services	12.9%	10.8%
Consumer Cyclical	11.4%	10.0%
Healthcare	4.8%	8.5%
Consumer Defensive	4.3%	4.5%
Industrials	4.0%	7.9%
Energy	1.9%	3.2%
Real Estate	0.9%	1.7%
Basic Materials	0.6%	1.7%
Utilities	0.5%	2.0%

Return for Risk

TMFC vs. STRV — Risk / Return Rank

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

TMFC

TMFC Risk / Return Rank: 49
TMFC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 55
TMFC Sortino Ratio Rank: 53
TMFC Omega Ratio Rank: 53
TMFC Calmar Ratio Rank: 40
TMFC Martin Ratio Rank: 46

STRV

STRV Risk / Return Rank: 67
STRV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 68
STRV Sortino Ratio Rank: 68
STRV Omega Ratio Rank: 65
STRV Calmar Ratio Rank: 61
STRV Martin Ratio Rank: 73

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.

TMFC vs. STRV - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Motley Fool 100 Index ETF (TMFC) and Strive 500 ETF (STRV). 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.

	TMFC	STRV	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.91	2.28	-0.37
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.63	3.17	-0.54
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.33	1.40	-0.07
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.05	3.04	-1.00
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	7.63	13.78	-6.16
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

TMFC vs. STRV - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current TMFC Sharpe Ratio is 1.91, which is comparable to the STRV Sharpe Ratio of 2.28. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of TMFC and STRV, 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

	TMFC	STRV	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.91	2.28	-0.37
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.79	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.83	1.33	-0.50

Drawdowns

TMFC vs. STRV - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum TMFC drawdown since its inception was -33.06%, which is greater than STRV's maximum drawdown of -19.00%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for TMFC and STRV.

Drawdown Indicators

	TMFC	STRV	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-33.06%	-19.00%	-14.06%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-12.64%	-9.29%	-3.35%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-20.06%	-19.00%	-1.06%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-33.06%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.11%	-0.67%	-0.44%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-6.77%	-2.26%	-4.51%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.39%	2.05%	+1.34%

Volatility

TMFC vs. STRV - Volatility Comparison

Motley Fool 100 Index ETF (TMFC) has a higher volatility of 3.21% compared to Strive 500 ETF (STRV) at 2.79%. This indicates that TMFC's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than STRV based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	TMFC	STRV	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.21%	2.79%	+0.42%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	10.11%	9.31%	+0.80%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	13.52%	12.42%	+1.10%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	20.37%	16.10%	+4.27%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	21.99%	16.10%	+5.89%

TMFC vs. STRV - Expense Ratio Comparison

TMFC has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is higher than STRV's 0.05% expense ratio.

Dividends

TMFC vs. STRV - Dividend Comparison

TMFC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.13%, less than STRV's 1.02% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018
STRV Strive 500 ETF	1.02%	1.05%	1.13%	1.21%	0.37%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
TMFC Motley Fool 100 Index ETF	0.13%	0.14%	0.40%	0.26%	0.27%	0.23%	0.42%	0.50%	0.61%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both TMFC and STRV in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.93, TMFC and STRV 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.

Which is riskier, TMFC or STRV?

TMFC has higher volatility (3.21%) compared to STRV (2.79%). In terms of maximum drawdown, TMFC dropped -33.06% vs STRV's -19.00%.

Which ETF is better, TMFC or STRV?

On 3-year performance, TMFC leads with 26.20% vs 22.74% for STRV. On fees, STRV is cheaper at 0.05% per year. On volatility, STRV has been the lower-risk option at 2.79%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, TMFC or STRV?

Over the 3-year period, TMFC has performed better with a 26.20% return vs 22.74%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, TMFC or STRV?

STRV is cheaper with a 0.05% expense ratio, compared with 0.50% for TMFC.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, TMFC or STRV?

STRV has the higher dividend yield at 1.02%, compared with 0.13% for TMFC.

What is the main difference between TMFC and STRV?

TMFC tracks Motley Fool 100 Index, while STRV tracks Bloomberg US Large Cap Index. They also come from different issuers: Motley Fool and Strive. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for TMFC and 0.05% for STRV.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

STRV currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.28 vs 1.91), 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.