TMFG vs. PIT

Last updated Jun 23, 2026

TMFG (Motley Fool Global Opportunities ETF) and PIT (VanEck Commodity Strategy ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - TMFG is a Global Equities fund actively managed by Motley Fool, while PIT is a Commodities fund actively managed by VanEck. Both are actively managed. Over the past 3 years, TMFG returned 12.08%/yr vs 19.51%/yr for PIT. At a 0.07 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. TMFG charges 0.85%/yr vs 0.55%/yr for PIT.

Performance

TMFG vs. PIT - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Motley Fool Global Opportunities ETF (TMFG) and VanEck Commodity Strategy ETF (PIT). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, TMFG achieves a 1.05% return, which is significantly lower than PIT's 27.31% return.

TMFG

• 1D: -1.46%
• 1M: -1.21%
• YTD: 1.05%
• 6M: 0.85%
• 1Y: 4.06%
• 3Y*: 12.08%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

PIT

• 1D: -0.75%
• 1M: -10.60%
• YTD: 27.31%
• 6M: 26.74%
• 1Y: 38.33%
• 3Y*: 19.51%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

TMFG vs. PIT - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
TMFG Motley Fool Global Opportunities ETF	1.05%	6.75%	15.45%	28.36%	-1.12%
PIT VanEck Commodity Strategy ETF	27.31%	21.63%	6.77%	-4.54%	1.67%

Correlation

The correlation between TMFG and PIT is -0.12, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.12
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.03
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 22, 2022	0.07

The correlation between TMFG and PIT shifts across timeframes, from -0.12 (1 year) to 0.07 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

TMFG vs. PIT — Risk / Return Rank

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

TMFG

TMFG Risk / Return Rank: 12
TMFG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 13
TMFG Sortino Ratio Rank: 12
TMFG Omega Ratio Rank: 11
TMFG Calmar Ratio Rank: 12
TMFG Martin Ratio Rank: 14

PIT

PIT Risk / Return Rank: 55
PIT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 54
PIT Sortino Ratio Rank: 48
PIT Omega Ratio Rank: 52
PIT Calmar Ratio Rank: 57
PIT Martin Ratio Rank: 62

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.

TMFG vs. PIT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Motley Fool Global Opportunities ETF (TMFG) and VanEck Commodity Strategy ETF (PIT). 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.

	TMFG	PIT	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.30	1.78	-1.48
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.52	2.32	-1.80
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.06	1.32	-0.26
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.35	2.74	-2.40
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	1.17	10.88	-9.71

TMFG vs. PIT - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current TMFG Sharpe Ratio is 0.30, which is lower than the PIT Sharpe Ratio of 1.78. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of TMFG and PIT, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

TMFG vs. PIT - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum TMFG drawdown since its inception was -33.66%, which is greater than PIT's maximum drawdown of -14.05%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for TMFG and PIT.

Drawdown Indicators

	TMFG	PIT	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-33.66%	-14.05%	-19.61%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-11.81%	-14.05%	+2.24%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-16.60%	-14.05%	-2.55%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.85%	-14.05%	+11.20%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-10.39%	-4.07%	-6.32%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.48%	3.59%	-0.11%

Volatility

TMFG vs. PIT - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Motley Fool Global Opportunities ETF (TMFG) is 4.08%, while VanEck Commodity Strategy ETF (PIT) has a volatility of 4.67%. This indicates that TMFG experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than PIT based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	TMFG	PIT	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.08%	4.67%	-0.59%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	10.56%	19.36%	-8.80%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	13.49%	21.66%	-8.17%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	18.59%	17.50%	+1.09%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	18.59%	17.50%	+1.09%

TMFG vs. PIT - Expense Ratio Comparison

TMFG has a 0.85% expense ratio, which is higher than PIT's 0.55% expense ratio.

Dividends

TMFG vs. PIT - Dividend Comparison

TMFG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.27%, less than PIT's 7.00% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022
PIT VanEck Commodity Strategy ETF	7.00%	8.92%	3.59%	6.44%	0.00%
TMFG Motley Fool Global Opportunities ETF	0.27%	0.27%	13.94%	5.42%	0.70%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both TMFG and PIT in my portfolio?

TMFG and PIT have a correlation of -0.12, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, TMFG or PIT?

PIT has higher volatility (4.67%) compared to TMFG (4.08%). In terms of maximum drawdown, TMFG dropped -33.66% vs PIT's -14.05%.

Which ETF is better, TMFG or PIT?

On 3-year performance, PIT leads with 19.51% vs 12.08% for TMFG. On fees, PIT is cheaper at 0.55% per year. On volatility, TMFG has been the lower-risk option at 4.08%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, TMFG or PIT?

Over the 3-year period, PIT has performed better with a 19.51% return vs 12.08%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, TMFG or PIT?

PIT is cheaper with a 0.55% expense ratio, compared with 0.85% for TMFG.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, TMFG or PIT?

PIT has the higher dividend yield at 7.00%, compared with 0.27% for TMFG.

What is the main difference between TMFG and PIT?

TMFG is categorized as Global Equities, while PIT is Commodities. They also come from different issuers: Motley Fool and VanEck. Their fees differ too: 0.85% for TMFG and 0.55% for PIT.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

PIT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.78 vs 0.30), 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.