TMFS vs. MFIG

Last updated Apr 1, 2026

Compare and contrast key facts about Motley Fool Small-Cap Growth ETF (TMFS) and Motley Fool Innovative Growth Factor ETF (MFIG).

TMFS and MFIG are both exchange-traded funds (ETFs), meaning they are traded on stock exchanges and can be bought and sold throughout the day. TMFS is an actively managed fund by Motley Fool. It was launched on Oct 29, 2018. MFIG is a passively managed fund by Motley Fool that tracks the performance of the Motley Fool Innovative Growth Index. It was launched on Dec 8, 2025.

Performance

TMFS vs. MFIG - Performance Comparison

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

TMFS vs. MFIG - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
TMFS Motley Fool Small-Cap Growth ETF	-8.10%	-1.11%
MFIG Motley Fool Innovative Growth Factor ETF	-10.10%	-0.21%

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, TMFS achieves a -8.10% return, which is significantly higher than MFIG's -10.10% return.

TMFS

• 1D: 3.19%
• 1M: -9.83%
• YTD: -8.10%
• 6M: -7.25%
• 1Y: -1.30%
• 3Y*: 6.23%
• 5Y*: -3.08%
• 10Y*: —

MFIG

• 1D: 3.06%
• 1M: -4.67%
• YTD: -10.10%
• 6M: —
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

TMFS vs. MFIG - Expense Ratio Comparison

TMFS has a 0.85% expense ratio, which is higher than MFIG's 0.50% expense ratio.

TMFS

Motley Fool Small-Cap Growth ETF

MFIG

Motley Fool Innovative Growth Factor ETF

Return for Risk

TMFS vs. MFIG — Risk / Return Rank

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

TMFS

TMFS Risk / Return Rank: 11
TMFS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 11
TMFS Sortino Ratio Rank: 11
TMFS Omega Ratio Rank: 11
TMFS Calmar Ratio Rank: 11
TMFS Martin Ratio Rank: 10

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.

TMFS vs. MFIG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Motley Fool Small-Cap Growth ETF (TMFS) and Motley Fool Innovative Growth Factor ETF (MFIG). 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.

	TMFS	MFIG	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	-0.05	—	—
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	0.10	—	—
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.01	—	—
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.09	—	—
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	-0.25	—	—
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	TMFS	MFIG	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.05	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	-0.13	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.31	-1.74	+2.05

Correlation

The correlation between TMFS and MFIG is 0.66, which is considered to be moderate. This suggests that the two assets have some degree of positive relationship in their price movements. Moderate correlation can be acceptable for portfolio diversification, offering a balance between risk and potential returns.

Dividends

TMFS vs. MFIG - Dividend Comparison

Neither TMFS nor MFIG has paid dividends to shareholders.

	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019
TMFS Motley Fool Small-Cap Growth ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.34%	2.37%	5.57%	2.65%
MFIG Motley Fool Innovative Growth Factor ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Drawdowns

TMFS vs. MFIG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum TMFS drawdown since its inception was -48.79%, which is greater than MFIG's maximum drawdown of -14.29%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for TMFS and MFIG.

Drawdown Indicators

	TMFS	MFIG	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-48.79%	-14.29%	-34.50%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-15.73%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-45.68%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-25.54%	-11.61%	-13.93%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-19.45%	-5.10%	-14.35%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	5.27%	—	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	TMFS	MFIG	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.89%	—	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	14.48%	—	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	24.44%	17.50%	+6.94%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	22.98%	17.50%	+5.48%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	25.65%	17.50%	+8.15%