TMFS vs. TMFC
TMFS (Motley Fool Small-Cap Growth ETF) and TMFC (Motley Fool 100 Index ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - TMFS is a Small Cap Growth Equities fund actively managed by Motley Fool, while TMFC is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund tracking the Motley Fool 100 Index. TMFS is actively managed, while TMFC is passively managed. Over the past 5 years, TMFS returned -1.87%/yr vs 14.51%/yr for TMFC. A 0.71 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. TMFS charges 0.85%/yr vs 0.50%/yr for TMFC.
Performance
TMFS vs. TMFC - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, TMFS achieves a 0.39% return, which is significantly lower than TMFC's 5.63% return.
TMFS
- 1D
- 0.07%
- 1M
- 2.03%
- YTD
- 0.39%
- 6M
- -3.63%
- 1Y
- 0.91%
- 3Y*
- 8.09%
- 5Y*
- -1.87%
- 10Y*
- —
TMFC
- 1D
- -0.84%
- 1M
- -2.18%
- YTD
- 5.63%
- 6M
- 5.27%
- 1Y
- 23.51%
- 3Y*
- 24.09%
- 5Y*
- 14.51%
- 10Y*
- —
TMFS vs. TMFC - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
TMFS Motley Fool Small-Cap Growth ETF | 0.39% | -1.59% | 15.41% | 25.40% | -33.15% | -2.38% | 58.52% | 40.19% | -6.14% |
TMFC Motley Fool 100 Index ETF | 5.63% | 19.55% | 35.17% | 47.04% | -30.86% | 25.30% | 42.00% | 34.70% | -5.08% |
Correlation
The correlation between TMFS and TMFC is 0.57, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.57 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.62 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.70 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 30, 2018 | 0.71 |
The correlation between TMFS and TMFC shifts across timeframes, from 0.57 (1 year) to 0.71 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
TMFS vs. TMFC - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
TMFS
TMFC
Technology
Industrials
Healthcare
Financial Services
Consumer Cyclical
Real Estate
Energy
Basic Materials
Consumer Defensive
Communication Services
-
Utilities
-
Technology
TMFS
TMFC
Industrials
TMFS
TMFC
Healthcare
TMFS
TMFC
Financial Services
TMFS
TMFC
Consumer Cyclical
TMFS
TMFC
Real Estate
TMFS
TMFC
Energy
TMFS
TMFC
Basic Materials
TMFS
TMFC
Consumer Defensive
TMFS
TMFC
Communication Services
TMFS
-
TMFC
Utilities
TMFS
-
TMFC
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. TMFC — Risk / Return Rank
TMFS
TMFC
TMFS vs. TMFC - 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 100 Index ETF (TMFC). 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 | TMFC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -1.62 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -2.06 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.02 | 1.29 | -0.27 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.06 | 1.87 | -1.81 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 0.16 | 6.78 | -6.62 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
TMFS vs. TMFC - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum TMFS drawdown since its inception was -48.79%, which is greater than TMFC's maximum drawdown of -33.06%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for TMFS and TMFC.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| TMFS | TMFC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -48.79% | -33.06% | -15.73% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -15.73% | -12.64% | -3.09% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -27.05% | -20.06% | -6.99% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -45.68% | -33.06% | -12.62% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -18.66% | -3.67% | -14.99% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -19.47% | -6.75% | -12.72% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 5.89% | 3.48% | +2.41% |
Volatility
TMFS vs. TMFC - Volatility Comparison
Motley Fool Small-Cap Growth ETF (TMFS) has a higher volatility of 5.67% compared to Motley Fool 100 Index ETF (TMFC) at 5.31%. This indicates that TMFS's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than TMFC based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| TMFS | TMFC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 5.67% | 5.31% | +0.36% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 14.28% | 11.15% | +3.13% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 20.01% | 14.24% | +5.77% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 23.01% | 20.48% | +2.53% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 25.50% | 22.00% | +3.50% |
TMFS vs. TMFC - Expense Ratio Comparison
TMFS has a 0.85% expense ratio, which is higher than TMFC's 0.50% expense ratio.
Dividends
TMFS vs. TMFC - Dividend Comparison
TMFS has not paid dividends to shareholders, while TMFC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.14%.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
TMFC Motley Fool 100 Index ETF | 0.14% | 0.14% | 0.40% | 0.26% | 0.27% | 0.23% | 0.42% | 0.50% | 0.61% |
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% |
Frequently Asked Questions
TMFS and TMFC have a correlation of 0.57, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
TMFS has higher volatility (5.67%) compared to TMFC (5.31%). In terms of maximum drawdown, TMFS dropped -48.79% vs TMFC's -33.06%.
On 5-year performance, TMFC leads with 14.51% vs -1.87% for TMFS. On fees, TMFC is cheaper at 0.50% per year. On volatility, TMFC has been the lower-risk option at 5.31%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 5-year period, TMFC has performed better with a 14.51% return vs -1.87%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
TMFC is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.85% for TMFS.
TMFC has the higher dividend yield at 0.14%, compared with 0.00% for TMFS.
TMFS is categorized as Small Cap Growth Equities, while TMFC is Large Cap Growth Equities. Their fees differ too: 0.85% for TMFS and 0.50% for TMFC.
TMFC currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.66 vs 0.05), 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 TMFC
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