TMFG vs. TMFS

Last updated Aug 4, 2026

TMFG (Motley Fool Global Opportunities ETF) and TMFS (Motley Fool Small-Cap Growth ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - TMFG is a Global Equities fund actively managed by Motley Fool, while TMFS is a Small Cap Growth Equities fund actively managed by Motley Fool. Both are actively managed. Over the past 3 years, TMFG returned 12.52%/yr vs 7.42%/yr for TMFS. Their correlation of 0.82 means they have usually moved in the same direction. Both charge a 0.85% expense ratio.

Performance

TMFG vs. TMFS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Motley Fool Global Opportunities ETF (TMFG) and Motley Fool Small-Cap Growth ETF (TMFS). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, TMFG achieves a 5.76% return, which is significantly higher than TMFS's 4.23% return.

TMFG

• 1D: 1.85%
• 1M: 2.53%
• 6M: 5.07%
• YTD: 5.76%
• 1Y: 8.13%
• 3Y*: 12.52%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 4.47%

TMFS

• 1D: 2.46%
• 1M: 0.58%
• 6M: 2.88%
• YTD: 4.23%
• 1Y: 5.66%
• 3Y*: 7.42%
• 5Y*: -1.00%
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 9.49%

*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)
TMFG Motley Fool Global Opportunities ETF	$305.59K	$359.54K	$429.54K
TMFS Motley Fool Small-Cap Growth ETF	$110.91K	$114.36K	$199.28K

TMFG vs. TMFS - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
TMFG Motley Fool Global Opportunities ETF	5.76%	6.75%	15.45%	28.36%	-28.17%	1.91%
TMFS Motley Fool Small-Cap Growth ETF	4.23%	-1.59%	15.41%	25.40%	-33.15%	4.11%

Correlation

The correlation between TMFG and TMFS is 0.72, which is moderate. They have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently, sharing some price drivers without tracking each other closely.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.72
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history.	0.77
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 13, 2021	0.82

The correlation between TMFG and TMFS has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.72 to 0.82 - a consistent structural relationship.

TMFG vs. TMFS - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	TMFG	TMFS
Industrials	23.9%	22.4%
Financial Services	17.9%	13.8%
Communication Services	13.0%	-
Technology	12.4%	24.5%
Consumer Cyclical	10.7%	7.4%
Real Estate	8.1%	5.2%
Healthcare	6.6%	22.2%
Consumer Defensive	5.4%	0.0%
Basic Materials	2.1%	2.1%
Energy	-	2.4%
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

TMFG vs. TMFS — Risk / Return Rank

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

TMFG

TMFG Risk / Return Rank: 25
TMFG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 26
TMFG Sortino Ratio Rank: 25
TMFG Omega Ratio Rank: 23
TMFG Calmar Ratio Rank: 23
TMFG Martin Ratio Rank: 28

TMFS

TMFS Risk / Return Rank: 17
TMFS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 17
TMFS Sortino Ratio Rank: 17
TMFS Omega Ratio Rank: 16
TMFS Calmar Ratio Rank: 17
TMFS Martin Ratio Rank: 18

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.

TMFG vs. TMFS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Motley Fool Global Opportunities ETF (TMFG) and Motley Fool Small-Cap Growth ETF (TMFS). 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	TMFS	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.60	0.29	+0.32
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.94	0.58	+0.36
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.11	1.06	+0.05
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.69	0.36	+0.33
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	2.33	0.99	+1.33

TMFG vs. TMFS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current TMFG Sharpe Ratio is 0.60, which is higher than the TMFS Sharpe Ratio of 0.29. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of TMFG and TMFS, 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. TMFS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum TMFG drawdown since its inception was -33.66%, smaller than the maximum TMFS drawdown of -48.79%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for TMFG and TMFS.

Drawdown Indicators

	TMFG	TMFS	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-33.66%	-48.79%	+15.13%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-11.81%	-15.73%	+3.92%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-16.60%	-27.05%	+10.45%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-45.68%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	-15.55%	+15.55%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-10.16%	-19.43%	+9.27%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.50%	5.70%	-2.20%

Volatility

TMFG vs. TMFS - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Motley Fool Global Opportunities ETF (TMFG) is 3.92%, while Motley Fool Small-Cap Growth ETF (TMFS) has a volatility of 4.63%. This indicates that TMFG experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than TMFS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	TMFG	TMFS	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.92%	4.63%	-0.71%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	10.52%	14.13%	-3.61%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	13.59%	19.85%	-6.26%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	18.45%	23.00%	-4.55%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	18.45%	25.38%	-6.93%

TMFG vs. TMFS - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both TMFG and TMFS have an expense ratio of 0.85%.

Dividends

TMFG vs. TMFS - Dividend Comparison

TMFG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.26%, while TMFS has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019
TMFG Motley Fool Global Opportunities ETF	0.26%	0.27%	13.94%	5.42%	0.70%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
TMFS Motley Fool Small-Cap Growth ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.34%	2.37%	5.57%	2.65%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both TMFG and TMFS in my portfolio?

TMFG and TMFS have a correlation of 0.72, 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 TMFS?

TMFS has higher volatility (4.63%) compared to TMFG (3.92%). In terms of maximum drawdown, TMFG dropped -33.66% vs TMFS's -48.79%.

Which ETF is better, TMFG or TMFS?

On 3-year performance, TMFG leads with 12.52% vs 7.42% for TMFS. Both ETFs have the same 0.85% expense ratio. On volatility, TMFG has been the lower-risk option at 3.92%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, TMFG or TMFS?

Over the 3-year period, TMFG has performed better with a 12.52% return vs 7.42%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, TMFG or TMFS?

TMFG and TMFS have the same expense ratio: 0.85% per year.

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

TMFG has the higher dividend yield at 0.26%, compared with 0.00% for TMFS.

What is the main difference between TMFG and TMFS?

TMFG is categorized as Global Equities, while TMFS is Small Cap Growth Equities.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

TMFG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.60 vs 0.29), 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.