TMFS vs. TMFM

Last updated Aug 4, 2026

TMFS (Motley Fool Small-Cap Growth ETF) and TMFM (Motley Fool Mid-Cap Growth ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - TMFS is a Small Cap Growth Equities fund actively managed by Motley Fool, while TMFM is a Mid Cap Growth Equities fund actively managed by Motley Fool. Both are actively managed. Over the past 3 years, TMFS returned 7.42%/yr vs 3.61%/yr for TMFM. Their correlation of 0.88 means they have usually moved in the same direction. Both charge a 0.85% expense ratio.

Performance

TMFS vs. TMFM - 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 Mid-Cap Growth ETF (TMFM). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, TMFS achieves a 4.23% return, which is significantly higher than TMFM's -3.65% return.

TMFS

• 1D: 2.46%
• 1M: 0.58%
• 6M: 2.88%
• YTD: 4.23%
• 1Y: 5.66%
• 3Y*: 7.42%
• 5Y*: -1.00%
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 9.49%

TMFM

• 1D: 2.26%
• 1M: 1.14%
• 6M: -0.24%
• YTD: -3.65%
• 1Y: -12.23%
• 3Y*: 3.61%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: -1.56%

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
TMFM Motley Fool Mid-Cap Growth ETF	$160.88K	$175.97K	$232.99K
TMFS Motley Fool Small-Cap Growth ETF	$110.91K	$114.36K	$199.28K

TMFS vs. TMFM - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
TMFS Motley Fool Small-Cap Growth ETF	4.23%	-1.59%	15.41%	25.40%	-33.15%	4.11%
TMFM Motley Fool Mid-Cap Growth ETF	-3.65%	-8.98%	17.54%	21.81%	-27.36%	1.91%

Correlation

The correlation between TMFS and TMFM is 0.79, 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.	0.79
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history.	0.85
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 13, 2021	0.88

The correlation between TMFS and TMFM has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.79 to 0.88 - a consistent structural relationship.

TMFS vs. TMFM - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	TMFS	TMFM
Technology	24.5%	29.7%
Industrials	22.4%	21.6%
Healthcare	22.2%	24.5%
Financial Services	13.8%	14.2%
Consumer Cyclical	7.4%	3.5%
Real Estate	5.2%	3.9%
Energy	2.4%	-
Basic Materials	2.1%	-
Consumer Defensive	0.0%	2.6%
Communication Services	-	-
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

TMFS vs. TMFM — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

TMFS

TMFS Risk / Return Rank: 17
TMFS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 17
TMFS Sortino Ratio Rank: 17
TMFS Omega Ratio Rank: 16
TMFS Calmar Ratio Rank: 17
TMFS Martin Ratio Rank: 18

TMFM

TMFM Risk / Return Rank: 5
TMFM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4
TMFM Sortino Ratio Rank: 4
TMFM Omega Ratio Rank: 4
TMFM Calmar Ratio Rank: 5
TMFM Martin Ratio Rank: 6

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

TMFS vs. TMFM - 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 Mid-Cap Growth ETF (TMFM). 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	TMFM	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.29	-0.62	+0.91
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.58	-0.82	+1.40
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.06	0.91	+0.15
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.36	-0.49	+0.85
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	0.99	-0.84	+1.84

TMFS vs. TMFM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current TMFS Sharpe Ratio is 0.29, which is higher than the TMFM Sharpe Ratio of -0.62. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of TMFS and TMFM, 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

TMFS vs. TMFM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum TMFS drawdown since its inception was -48.79%, which is greater than TMFM's maximum drawdown of -31.75%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for TMFS and TMFM.

Drawdown Indicators

	TMFS	TMFM	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-48.79%	-31.75%	-17.04%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-15.73%	-25.13%	+9.40%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-27.05%	-31.75%	+4.70%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-45.68%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-15.55%	-21.60%	+6.05%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-19.43%	-16.16%	-3.27%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	5.70%	14.53%	-8.83%

Volatility

TMFS vs. TMFM - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Motley Fool Small-Cap Growth ETF (TMFS) is 4.63%, while Motley Fool Mid-Cap Growth ETF (TMFM) has a volatility of 6.31%. This indicates that TMFS experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than TMFM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	TMFS	TMFM	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.63%	6.31%	-1.68%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	14.13%	16.37%	-2.24%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	19.85%	19.75%	+0.10%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	23.00%	20.62%	+2.38%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	25.38%	20.62%	+4.76%

TMFS vs. TMFM - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both TMFS and TMFM have an expense ratio of 0.85%.

Dividends

TMFS vs. TMFM - Dividend Comparison

TMFS has not paid dividends to shareholders, while TMFM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.06%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019
TMFM Motley Fool Mid-Cap Growth ETF	0.06%	0.06%	16.27%	2.55%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
TMFS Motley Fool Small-Cap Growth ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.34%	2.37%	5.57%	2.65%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both TMFS and TMFM in my portfolio?

TMFS and TMFM have a correlation of 0.79, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, TMFS or TMFM?

TMFM has higher volatility (6.31%) compared to TMFS (4.63%). In terms of maximum drawdown, TMFS dropped -48.79% vs TMFM's -31.75%.

Which ETF is better, TMFS or TMFM?

On 3-year performance, TMFS leads with 7.42% vs 3.61% for TMFM. Both ETFs have the same 0.85% expense ratio. On volatility, TMFS has been the lower-risk option at 4.63%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, TMFS or TMFM?

Over the 3-year period, TMFS has performed better with a 7.42% return vs 3.61%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, TMFS or TMFM?

TMFS and TMFM have the same expense ratio: 0.85% per year.

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

TMFM has the higher dividend yield at 0.06%, compared with 0.00% for TMFS.

What is the main difference between TMFS and TMFM?

TMFS is categorized as Small Cap Growth Equities, while TMFM is Mid Cap Growth Equities.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

TMFS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.29 vs -0.62), 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.