TMFG vs. MFIG
TMFG (Motley Fool Global Opportunities ETF) and MFIG (Motley Fool Innovative Growth Factor ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - TMFG is a Global Equities fund actively managed by Motley Fool, while MFIG is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund tracking the Motley Fool Innovative Growth Index. TMFG is actively managed, while MFIG is passively managed. Their correlation of 0.81 suggests significant overlap in exposure. TMFG charges 0.85%/yr vs 0.50%/yr for MFIG.
Performance
TMFG vs. MFIG - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, TMFG achieves a 1.99% return, which is significantly lower than MFIG's 4.31% return.
TMFG
- 1D
- -0.39%
- 1M
- -0.08%
- YTD
- 1.99%
- 6M
- 2.14%
- 1Y
- 3.83%
- 3Y*
- 12.53%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
MFIG
- 1D
- -1.31%
- 1M
- 6.47%
- YTD
- 4.31%
- 6M
- —
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
TMFG vs. MFIG - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
TMFG Motley Fool Global Opportunities ETF | 1.99% | 0.44% |
MFIG Motley Fool Innovative Growth Factor ETF | 4.31% | -0.21% |
Correlation
The correlation between TMFG and MFIG is 0.81, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 10, 2025 | 0.81 |
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
TMFG vs. MFIG — Risk / Return Rank
TMFG
MFIG
TMFG vs. MFIG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Motley Fool Global Opportunities ETF (TMFG) and Motley Fool Innovative Growth Factor ETF (MFIG). 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.
| TMFG | MFIG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.06 | — | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.33 | — | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 1.10 | — | — |
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
| TMFG | MFIG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.30 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.20 | 0.53 | -0.33 |
Drawdowns
TMFG vs. MFIG - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum TMFG drawdown since its inception was -33.66%, which is greater than MFIG's maximum drawdown of -14.29%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for TMFG and MFIG.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| TMFG | MFIG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -33.66% | -14.29% | -19.37% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -11.81% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -16.60% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -1.16% | -2.15% | +0.99% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -10.49% | -4.63% | -5.86% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.48% | — | — |
Volatility
TMFG vs. MFIG - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| TMFG | MFIG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 2.64% | — | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 10.07% | — | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 13.03% | 16.58% | -3.55% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 18.60% | 16.58% | +2.02% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 18.60% | 16.58% | +2.02% |
TMFG vs. MFIG - Expense Ratio Comparison
TMFG has a 0.85% expense ratio, which is higher than MFIG's 0.50% expense ratio.
Dividends
TMFG vs. MFIG - Dividend Comparison
TMFG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.26%, while MFIG has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
MFIG Motley Fool Innovative Growth Factor ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
TMFG Motley Fool Global Opportunities ETF | 0.26% | 0.27% | 13.94% | 5.42% | 0.70% |
Frequently Asked Questions
TMFG and MFIG have a correlation of 0.81, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, MFIG is cheaper at 0.50% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
MFIG is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.85% for TMFG.
TMFG has the higher dividend yield at 0.26%, compared with 0.00% for MFIG.
TMFG is categorized as Global Equities, while MFIG is Large Cap Growth Equities. Their fees differ too: 0.85% for TMFG and 0.50% for MFIG.
Find the right allocation for TMFG and MFIG
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