PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
VLU vs. FUNL
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

VLU vs. FUNL - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in SPDR S&P 1500 Value Tilt ETF (VLU) and CornerCap Fundametrics Large-Cap ETF FUNL (FUNL). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, VLU achieves a 12.99% return, which is significantly higher than FUNL's 5.66% return.


VLU

1D
-0.49%
1M
3.04%
YTD
12.99%
6M
13.61%
1Y
29.22%
3Y*
20.61%
5Y*
11.91%
10Y*
13.99%

FUNL

1D
0.00%
1M
0.00%
YTD
5.66%
6M
7.22%
1Y
18.97%
3Y*
16.53%
5Y*
9.42%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

VLU vs. FUNL - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020
VLU
SPDR S&P 1500 Value Tilt ETF
12.99%16.70%17.24%17.18%-8.24%30.95%17.58%
FUNL
CornerCap Fundametrics Large-Cap ETF FUNL
5.66%14.62%15.55%14.33%-5.76%25.93%14.92%

Correlation

The correlation between VLU and FUNL is 0.80, 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

0.80

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.91

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.95

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 21, 2020

0.95

The correlation between VLU and FUNL shifts across timeframes, from 0.80 (1 year) to 0.95 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

VLU vs. FUNL - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
VLU
FUNL

Financial Services

18.8%
19.3%

Technology

17.8%
14.6%

Healthcare

11.7%
15.3%

Consumer Cyclical

10.4%
6.5%

Communication Services

8.8%
5.8%

Industrials

8.2%
11.5%

Consumer Defensive

7.4%
7.0%

Energy

7.2%
7.6%

Utilities

3.6%
5.0%

Real Estate

3.4%
4.5%

Basic Materials

2.6%
2.2%

Financial Services

VLU
18.8%
FUNL
19.3%

Technology

VLU
17.8%
FUNL
14.6%

Healthcare

VLU
11.7%
FUNL
15.3%

Consumer Cyclical

VLU
10.4%
FUNL
6.5%

Communication Services

VLU
8.8%
FUNL
5.8%

Industrials

VLU
8.2%
FUNL
11.5%

Consumer Defensive

VLU
7.4%
FUNL
7.0%

Energy

VLU
7.2%
FUNL
7.6%

Utilities

VLU
3.6%
FUNL
5.0%

Real Estate

VLU
3.4%
FUNL
4.5%

Basic Materials

VLU
2.6%
FUNL
2.2%

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

VLU vs. FUNL — Risk / Return Rank

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

VLU
VLU Risk / Return Rank: 8383
Overall Rank
VLU Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8282
Sharpe Ratio Rank
VLU Sortino Ratio Rank: 8383
Sortino Ratio Rank
VLU Omega Ratio Rank: 8181
Omega Ratio Rank
VLU Calmar Ratio Rank: 8484
Calmar Ratio Rank
VLU Martin Ratio Rank: 8686
Martin Ratio Rank

FUNL
FUNL Risk / Return Rank: 8080
Overall Rank
FUNL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6767
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FUNL Sortino Ratio Rank: 7272
Sortino Ratio Rank
FUNL Omega Ratio Rank: 7979
Omega Ratio Rank
FUNL Calmar Ratio Rank: 8787
Calmar Ratio Rank
FUNL Martin Ratio Rank: 9292
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

VLU vs. FUNL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for SPDR S&P 1500 Value Tilt ETF (VLU) and CornerCap Fundametrics Large-Cap ETF FUNL (FUNL). 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.


VLUFUNLDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.51

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.53

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.49

1.47

+0.02

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

4.63

5.01

-0.38

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

18.56

23.31

-4.75

VLU vs. FUNL - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current VLU Sharpe Ratio is 2.70, which is comparable to the FUNL Sharpe Ratio of 2.19. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of VLU and FUNL, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


VLUFUNLDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.70

2.19

+0.51

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.78

0.63

+0.15

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.78

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.82

0.95

-0.13

Drawdowns

VLU vs. FUNL - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum VLU drawdown since its inception was -37.39%, which is greater than FUNL's maximum drawdown of -19.35%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for VLU and FUNL.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


VLUFUNLDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-37.39%

-19.35%

-18.04%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-6.34%

-3.83%

-2.51%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-16.22%

-17.37%

+1.15%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-19.55%

-19.35%

-0.20%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-37.39%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.49%

-0.12%

-0.37%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-3.74%

-3.54%

-0.20%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.58%

0.82%

+0.76%

Volatility

VLU vs. FUNL - Volatility Comparison

SPDR S&P 1500 Value Tilt ETF (VLU) has a higher volatility of 2.25% compared to CornerCap Fundametrics Large-Cap ETF FUNL (FUNL) at 0.00%. This indicates that VLU's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FUNL based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


VLUFUNLDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

2.25%

0.00%

+2.25%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

7.70%

5.24%

+2.46%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

10.90%

8.82%

+2.08%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

15.40%

15.16%

+0.24%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

18.09%

15.29%

+2.80%

VLU vs. FUNL - Expense Ratio Comparison

VLU has a 0.12% expense ratio, which is lower than FUNL's 0.50% expense ratio.


Dividends

VLU vs. FUNL - Dividend Comparison

VLU's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.62%, less than FUNL's 2.25% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
FUNL
CornerCap Fundametrics Large-Cap ETF FUNL
2.25%2.10%1.78%1.69%1.84%1.55%0.45%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
VLU
SPDR S&P 1500 Value Tilt ETF
1.62%1.82%2.00%2.02%2.16%1.86%1.98%2.19%2.57%1.96%2.14%6.37%

Frequently Asked Questions


VLU and FUNL have a correlation of 0.80, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

VLU has higher volatility (2.25%) compared to FUNL (0.00%). In terms of maximum drawdown, VLU dropped -37.39% vs FUNL's -19.35%.

On 5-year performance, VLU leads with 11.91% vs 9.42% for FUNL. On fees, VLU is cheaper at 0.12% per year. On volatility, FUNL has been the lower-risk option at 0.00%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 5-year period, VLU has performed better with a 11.91% return vs 9.42%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

VLU is cheaper with a 0.12% expense ratio, compared with 0.50% for FUNL.

FUNL has the higher dividend yield at 2.25%, compared with 1.62% for VLU.

They also come from different issuers: State Street and CornerCap. Their fees differ too: 0.12% for VLU and 0.50% for FUNL.

VLU currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.70 vs 2.19), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for VLU and FUNL

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