TMFM vs. CSHP
TMFM (Motley Fool Mid-Cap Growth ETF) and CSHP (iShares Enhanced Short-Term Bond Active ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - TMFM is a Mid Cap Growth Equities fund actively managed by Motley Fool, while CSHP is a Ultrashort Bond fund actively managed by iShares. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, TMFM returned -16.67% vs 3.94% for CSHP. At a 0.05 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. TMFM charges 0.85%/yr vs 0.20%/yr for CSHP.
Performance
TMFM vs. CSHP - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, TMFM achieves a -6.92% return, which is significantly lower than CSHP's 2.09% return.
TMFM
- 1D
- -0.55%
- 1M
- 2.44%
- 6M
- -10.09%
- YTD
- -6.92%
- 1Y
- -16.67%
- 3Y*
- 2.32%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
CSHP
- 1D
- -0.02%
- 1M
- 0.38%
- 6M
- 1.98%
- YTD
- 2.09%
- 1Y
- 3.94%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
TMFM vs. CSHP - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | |
|---|---|---|---|
TMFM Motley Fool Mid-Cap Growth ETF | -6.92% | -8.98% | 7.18% |
CSHP iShares Enhanced Short-Term Bond Active ETF | 2.09% | 4.10% | 2.24% |
Correlation
The correlation between TMFM and CSHP is -0.11, 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 | -0.11 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 18, 2024 | 0.05 |
The correlation between TMFM and CSHP shifts across timeframes, from -0.11 (1 year) to 0.05 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
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
TMFM vs. CSHP — Risk / Return Rank
TMFM
CSHP
TMFM vs. CSHP - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Motley Fool Mid-Cap Growth ETF (TMFM) and iShares Enhanced Short-Term Bond Active ETF (CSHP). 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.
| TMFM | CSHP | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -9.23 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -16.66 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 0.86 | 4.94 | -4.08 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.68 | 19.49 | -20.18 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -1.19 | 224.95 | -226.14 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
TMFM vs. CSHP - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum TMFM drawdown since its inception was -31.75%, which is greater than CSHP's maximum drawdown of -0.21%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for TMFM and CSHP.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| TMFM | CSHP | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -31.75% | -0.21% | -31.54% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -26.59% | -0.21% | -26.38% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -31.75% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -24.26% | -0.02% | -24.24% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -16.05% | -0.01% | -16.04% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 15.30% | 0.02% | +15.28% |
Volatility
TMFM vs. CSHP - Volatility Comparison
Motley Fool Mid-Cap Growth ETF (TMFM) has a higher volatility of 5.49% compared to iShares Enhanced Short-Term Bond Active ETF (CSHP) at 0.37%. This indicates that TMFM's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CSHP based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| TMFM | CSHP | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 5.49% | 0.37% | +5.12% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 15.91% | 0.43% | +15.48% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 19.22% | 0.48% | +18.74% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 20.58% | 0.47% | +20.11% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 20.58% | 0.47% | +20.11% |
TMFM vs. CSHP - Expense Ratio Comparison
TMFM has a 0.85% expense ratio, which is higher than CSHP's 0.20% expense ratio.
Dividends
TMFM vs. CSHP - Dividend Comparison
TMFM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.07%, less than CSHP's 4.01% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
CSHP iShares Enhanced Short-Term Bond Active ETF | 4.01% | 5.39% | 1.96% | 0.00% |
TMFM Motley Fool Mid-Cap Growth ETF | 0.07% | 0.06% | 16.27% | 2.55% |
Frequently Asked Questions
TMFM and CSHP have a correlation of -0.11, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
TMFM has higher volatility (5.49%) compared to CSHP (0.37%). In terms of maximum drawdown, TMFM dropped -31.75% vs CSHP's -0.21%.
On 1-year performance, CSHP leads with 3.94% vs -16.67% for TMFM. On fees, CSHP is cheaper at 0.20% per year. On volatility, CSHP has been the lower-risk option at 0.37%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, CSHP has performed better with a 3.94% return vs -16.67%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
CSHP is cheaper with a 0.20% expense ratio, compared with 0.85% for TMFM.
CSHP has the higher dividend yield at 4.01%, compared with 0.07% for TMFM.
TMFM is categorized as Mid Cap Growth Equities, while CSHP is Ultrashort Bond. They also come from different issuers: Motley Fool and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.85% for TMFM and 0.20% for CSHP.
CSHP currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (8.28 vs -0.95), 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.
Find the right allocation for TMFM and CSHP
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