TMFM vs. FCUS
TMFM (Motley Fool Mid-Cap Growth ETF) and FCUS (Pinnacle Focused Opportunities ETF) are both Mid Cap Growth Equities funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past 3 years, TMFM returned 2.45%/yr vs 22.64%/yr for FCUS. At a 0.49 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. TMFM charges 0.85%/yr vs 0.79%/yr for FCUS.
Performance
TMFM vs. FCUS - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, TMFM achieves a -5.52% return, which is significantly lower than FCUS's 14.82% return.
TMFM
- 1D
- 1.85%
- 1M
- 4.42%
- 6M
- -8.00%
- YTD
- -5.52%
- 1Y
- -15.26%
- 3Y*
- 2.45%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
FCUS
- 1D
- -6.16%
- 1M
- -18.83%
- 6M
- 0.51%
- YTD
- 14.82%
- 1Y
- 41.41%
- 3Y*
- 22.64%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
TMFM vs. FCUS - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
TMFM Motley Fool Mid-Cap Growth ETF | -5.52% | -8.98% | 17.54% | 21.81% | -0.90% |
FCUS Pinnacle Focused Opportunities ETF | 14.82% | 13.69% | 30.59% | 21.13% | 0.87% |
Correlation
The correlation between TMFM and FCUS is 0.13, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.13 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.45 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 30, 2022 | 0.49 |
Over the past year, the correlation between TMFM and FCUS has dropped to 0.13 - well below their long-term average of 0.49, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.
TMFM vs. FCUS - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
TMFM
FCUS
Technology
Healthcare
Industrials
Financial Services
-
Real Estate
-
Consumer Cyclical
Consumer Defensive
Basic Materials
-
Communication Services
-
Energy
-
Utilities
-
-
Technology
TMFM
FCUS
Healthcare
TMFM
FCUS
Industrials
TMFM
FCUS
Financial Services
TMFM
FCUS
-
Real Estate
TMFM
FCUS
-
Consumer Cyclical
TMFM
FCUS
Consumer Defensive
TMFM
FCUS
Basic Materials
TMFM
-
FCUS
Communication Services
TMFM
-
FCUS
Energy
TMFM
-
FCUS
Utilities
TMFM
-
FCUS
-
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. FCUS — Risk / Return Rank
TMFM
FCUS
TMFM vs. FCUS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Motley Fool Mid-Cap Growth ETF (TMFM) and Pinnacle Focused Opportunities ETF (FCUS). 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 | FCUS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -1.87 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -2.58 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 0.88 | 1.20 | -0.31 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.58 | 1.77 | -2.35 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -0.99 | 6.67 | -7.65 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
TMFM vs. FCUS - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum TMFM drawdown since its inception was -31.75%, smaller than the maximum FCUS drawdown of -39.89%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for TMFM and FCUS.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| TMFM | FCUS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -31.75% | -39.89% | +8.14% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -26.59% | -23.49% | -3.10% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -31.75% | -39.89% | +8.14% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -23.12% | -23.49% | +0.37% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -16.08% | -7.61% | -8.47% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 15.47% | 6.23% | +9.24% |
Volatility
TMFM vs. FCUS - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Motley Fool Mid-Cap Growth ETF (TMFM) is 5.64%, while Pinnacle Focused Opportunities ETF (FCUS) has a volatility of 16.49%. This indicates that TMFM experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FCUS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| TMFM | FCUS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 5.64% | 16.49% | -10.85% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 16.01% | 30.37% | -14.36% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 19.15% | 38.75% | -19.60% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 20.56% | 31.20% | -10.64% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 20.56% | 31.20% | -10.64% |
TMFM vs. FCUS - Expense Ratio Comparison
TMFM has a 0.85% expense ratio, which is higher than FCUS's 0.79% expense ratio.
Dividends
TMFM vs. FCUS - Dividend Comparison
TMFM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.07%, less than FCUS's 3.77% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
FCUS Pinnacle Focused Opportunities ETF | 3.77% | 4.33% | 11.19% | 0.00% |
TMFM Motley Fool Mid-Cap Growth ETF | 0.07% | 0.06% | 16.27% | 2.55% |
Frequently Asked Questions
TMFM and FCUS have a correlation of 0.13, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
FCUS has higher volatility (16.49%) compared to TMFM (5.64%). In terms of maximum drawdown, TMFM dropped -31.75% vs FCUS's -39.89%.
On 3-year performance, FCUS leads with 22.64% vs 2.45% for TMFM. On fees, FCUS is cheaper at 0.79% per year. On volatility, TMFM has been the lower-risk option at 5.64%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 3-year period, FCUS has performed better with a 22.64% return vs 2.45%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
FCUS is cheaper with a 0.79% expense ratio, compared with 0.85% for TMFM.
FCUS has the higher dividend yield at 3.77%, compared with 0.07% for TMFM.
They also come from different issuers: Motley Fool and Pinnacle. Their fees differ too: 0.85% for TMFM and 0.79% for FCUS.
FCUS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.07 vs -0.80), 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 FCUS
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