TMFM vs. QMOM

Last updated Jun 25, 2026

TMFM (Motley Fool Mid-Cap Growth ETF) and QMOM (Alpha Architect U.S. Quantitative Momentum ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - TMFM is a Mid Cap Growth Equities fund actively managed by Motley Fool, while QMOM is a Momentum fund actively managed by Alpha Architect. Both are actively managed. Over the past 3 years, TMFM returned 2.90%/yr vs 21.04%/yr for QMOM. A 0.63 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. TMFM charges 0.85%/yr vs 0.28%/yr for QMOM.

Performance

TMFM vs. QMOM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Motley Fool Mid-Cap Growth ETF (TMFM) and Alpha Architect U.S. Quantitative Momentum ETF (QMOM). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, TMFM achieves a -10.13% return, which is significantly lower than QMOM's 18.66% return.

TMFM

• 1D: 1.47%
• 1M: 0.99%
• YTD: -10.13%
• 6M: -12.40%
• 1Y: -20.98%
• 3Y*: 2.90%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

QMOM

• 1D: -0.93%
• 1M: -0.03%
• YTD: 18.66%
• 6M: 16.00%
• 1Y: 22.36%
• 3Y*: 21.04%
• 5Y*: 9.92%
• 10Y*: 13.47%

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

TMFM vs. QMOM - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
TMFM Motley Fool Mid-Cap Growth ETF	-10.13%	-8.98%	17.54%	21.81%	-27.36%	1.91%
QMOM Alpha Architect U.S. Quantitative Momentum ETF	18.66%	2.36%	30.43%	9.50%	-6.99%	-0.74%

Correlation

The correlation between TMFM and QMOM is 0.37, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.37
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.59
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 13, 2021	0.63

Over the past year, the correlation between TMFM and QMOM has dropped to 0.37 - well below their long-term average of 0.63, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

TMFM vs. QMOM - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	TMFM	QMOM
Technology	31.7%	24.6%
Healthcare	24.2%	8.0%
Industrials	20.2%	25.6%
Financial Services	13.6%	1.9%
Real Estate	4.6%	-
Consumer Cyclical	3.4%	6.0%
Consumer Defensive	2.3%	2.0%
Basic Materials	-	15.9%
Communication Services	-	2.0%
Energy	-	16.0%
Utilities	-	2.0%

Return for Risk

TMFM vs. QMOM — Risk / Return Rank

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

TMFM

TMFM Risk / Return Rank: 2
TMFM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1
TMFM Sortino Ratio Rank: 1
TMFM Omega Ratio Rank: 2
TMFM Calmar Ratio Rank: 3
TMFM Martin Ratio Rank: 2

QMOM

QMOM Risk / Return Rank: 32
QMOM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 27
QMOM Sortino Ratio Rank: 26
QMOM Omega Ratio Rank: 27
QMOM Calmar Ratio Rank: 38
QMOM Martin Ratio Rank: 42

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.

TMFM vs. QMOM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Motley Fool Mid-Cap Growth ETF (TMFM) and Alpha Architect U.S. Quantitative Momentum ETF (QMOM). 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	QMOM	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-1.11	0.91	-2.02
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-1.60	1.36	-2.97
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.83	1.17	-0.34
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.77	1.78	-2.55
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-1.35	6.21	-7.56

TMFM vs. QMOM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current TMFM Sharpe Ratio is -1.11, which is lower than the QMOM Sharpe Ratio of 0.91. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of TMFM and QMOM, 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

TMFM vs. QMOM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum TMFM drawdown since its inception was -31.75%, smaller than the maximum QMOM drawdown of -39.13%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for TMFM and QMOM.

Drawdown Indicators

	TMFM	QMOM	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-31.75%	-39.13%	+7.38%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-27.34%	-12.65%	-14.69%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-31.75%	-26.46%	-5.29%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-26.82%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-39.13%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-26.87%	-5.15%	-21.72%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-15.97%	-12.88%	-3.09%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	15.53%	3.61%	+11.92%

Volatility

TMFM vs. QMOM - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Motley Fool Mid-Cap Growth ETF (TMFM) is 6.99%, while Alpha Architect U.S. Quantitative Momentum ETF (QMOM) has a volatility of 9.60%. This indicates that TMFM experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than QMOM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	TMFM	QMOM	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.99%	9.60%	-2.61%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	15.72%	21.14%	-5.42%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	18.94%	24.69%	-5.75%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	20.58%	24.42%	-3.84%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	20.58%	26.62%	-6.04%

TMFM vs. QMOM - Expense Ratio Comparison

TMFM has a 0.85% expense ratio, which is higher than QMOM's 0.28% expense ratio.

Dividends

TMFM vs. QMOM - Dividend Comparison

TMFM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.07%, less than QMOM's 0.46% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016
QMOM Alpha Architect U.S. Quantitative Momentum ETF	0.46%	0.54%	1.40%	0.87%	1.59%	0.12%	0.08%	0.01%	0.05%	0.13%	0.34%
TMFM Motley Fool Mid-Cap Growth ETF	0.07%	0.06%	16.27%	2.55%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both TMFM and QMOM in my portfolio?

TMFM and QMOM have a correlation of 0.37, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, TMFM or QMOM?

QMOM has higher volatility (9.60%) compared to TMFM (6.99%). In terms of maximum drawdown, TMFM dropped -31.75% vs QMOM's -39.13%.

Which ETF is better, TMFM or QMOM?

On 3-year performance, QMOM leads with 21.04% vs 2.90% for TMFM. On fees, QMOM is cheaper at 0.28% per year. On volatility, TMFM has been the lower-risk option at 6.99%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, TMFM or QMOM?

Over the 3-year period, QMOM has performed better with a 21.04% return vs 2.90%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, TMFM or QMOM?

QMOM is cheaper with a 0.28% expense ratio, compared with 0.85% for TMFM.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, TMFM or QMOM?

QMOM has the higher dividend yield at 0.46%, compared with 0.07% for TMFM.

What is the main difference between TMFM and QMOM?

TMFM is categorized as Mid Cap Growth Equities, while QMOM is Momentum. They also come from different issuers: Motley Fool and Alpha Architect. Their fees differ too: 0.85% for TMFM and 0.28% for QMOM.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

QMOM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.91 vs -1.11), 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.