TMFS vs. IWM
TMFS (Motley Fool Small-Cap Growth ETF) and IWM (iShares Russell 2000 ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - TMFS is a Small Cap Growth Equities fund actively managed by Motley Fool, while IWM is a Small Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the Russell 2000 Index. TMFS is actively managed, while IWM is passively managed. Over the past 5 years, TMFS returned -1.70%/yr vs 6.99%/yr for IWM. Their correlation of 0.86 means they have usually moved in the same direction. TMFS charges 0.85%/yr vs 0.19%/yr for IWM.
Performance
TMFS vs. IWM - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, TMFS achieves a 1.73% return, which is significantly lower than IWM's 18.79% return.
TMFS
- 1D
- -0.17%
- 1M
- -1.83%
- 6M
- 0.91%
- YTD
- 1.73%
- 1Y
- 3.12%
- 3Y*
- 5.68%
- 5Y*
- -1.70%
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- 9.16%
IWM
- 1D
- -0.48%
- 1M
- -2.14%
- 6M
- 12.62%
- YTD
- 18.79%
- 1Y
- 36.90%
- 3Y*
- 15.11%
- 5Y*
- 6.99%
- 10Y*
- 10.70%
- ALL TIME*
- 8.73%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $6.67B | $6.32B | $7.45B | |
| $105.61K | $113.15K | $201.92K |
TMFS vs. IWM - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
TMFS Motley Fool Small-Cap Growth ETF | 1.73% | -1.59% | 15.41% | 25.40% | -33.15% | -2.38% | 58.52% | 40.19% | -6.14% |
IWM iShares Russell 2000 ETF | 18.79% | 12.66% | 11.38% | 16.83% | -20.48% | 14.54% | 20.03% | 25.39% | -8.40% |
Correlation
The correlation between TMFS and IWM is 0.77, 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. | 0.77 |
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history. | 0.86 |
Correlation (5Y) Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period. | 0.89 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 30, 2018 | 0.86 |
The correlation between TMFS and IWM shifts across timeframes, from 0.77 (1 year) to 0.89 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
TMFS vs. IWM - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
TMFS
IWM
Technology
Industrials
Healthcare
Financial Services
Consumer Cyclical
Real Estate
Energy
Basic Materials
Consumer Defensive
Communication Services
-
Utilities
-
Technology
TMFS
IWM
Industrials
TMFS
IWM
Healthcare
TMFS
IWM
Financial Services
TMFS
IWM
Consumer Cyclical
TMFS
IWM
Real Estate
TMFS
IWM
Energy
TMFS
IWM
Basic Materials
TMFS
IWM
Consumer Defensive
TMFS
IWM
Communication Services
TMFS
-
IWM
Utilities
TMFS
-
IWM
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
TMFS vs. IWM — Risk / Return Rank
TMFS
IWM
TMFS vs. IWM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Motley Fool Small-Cap Growth ETF (TMFS) and iShares Russell 2000 ETF (IWM). 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.
| TMFS | IWM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -1.68 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -2.23 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.03 | 1.30 | -0.27 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.11 | 3.11 | -3.00 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 0.30 | 11.02 | -10.72 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
TMFS vs. IWM - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum TMFS drawdown since its inception was -48.79%, smaller than the maximum IWM drawdown of -59.05%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for TMFS and IWM.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| TMFS | IWM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -48.79% | -59.05% | +10.26% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -15.73% | -11.03% | -4.70% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -27.05% | -27.50% | +0.45% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -45.68% | -31.91% | -13.77% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -41.13% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -17.58% | -3.08% | -14.50% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -19.44% | -10.71% | -8.73% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 5.70% | 3.11% | +2.59% |
Volatility
TMFS vs. IWM - Volatility Comparison
Motley Fool Small-Cap Growth ETF (TMFS) and iShares Russell 2000 ETF (IWM) have volatilities of 3.90% and 3.82%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| TMFS | IWM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 3.90% | 3.82% | +0.08% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 13.93% | 14.12% | -0.19% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 19.75% | 19.41% | +0.34% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 22.97% | 22.48% | +0.49% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 25.38% | 23.01% | +2.37% |
TMFS vs. IWM - Expense Ratio Comparison
TMFS has a 0.85% expense ratio, which is higher than IWM's 0.19% expense ratio.
Dividends
TMFS vs. IWM - Dividend Comparison
TMFS has not paid dividends to shareholders, while IWM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.91%.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
IWM iShares Russell 2000 ETF | 0.91% | 1.04% | 1.15% | 1.35% | 1.48% | 0.94% | 1.04% | 1.26% | 1.40% | 1.26% | 1.38% | 1.54% |
TMFS Motley Fool Small-Cap Growth ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.34% | 2.37% | 5.57% | 2.65% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
TMFS and IWM have a correlation of 0.77, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
TMFS has higher volatility (3.90%) compared to IWM (3.82%). In terms of maximum drawdown, TMFS dropped -48.79% vs IWM's -59.05%.
On 5-year performance, IWM leads with 6.99% vs -1.70% for TMFS. On fees, IWM is cheaper at 0.19% per year. Their volatility is very similar. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 5-year period, IWM has performed better with a 6.99% return vs -1.70%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
IWM is cheaper with a 0.19% expense ratio, compared with 0.85% for TMFS.
IWM has the higher dividend yield at 0.91%, compared with 0.00% for TMFS.
TMFS is categorized as Small Cap Growth Equities, while IWM is Small Cap Blend Equities. They also come from different issuers: Motley Fool and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.85% for TMFS and 0.19% for IWM.
IWM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.77 vs 0.09), 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 TMFS and IWM
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