XNAV vs. TMFC

Last updated Jun 26, 2026

XNAV (FundX Aggressive ETF) and TMFC (Motley Fool 100 Index ETF) are both Large Cap Growth Equities funds. XNAV is actively managed, while TMFC is passively managed. Over the past 3 years, XNAV returned 22.81%/yr vs 23.60%/yr for TMFC. Their correlation of 0.86 suggests significant overlap in exposure. XNAV charges 1.30%/yr vs 0.50%/yr for TMFC.

Performance

XNAV vs. TMFC - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in FundX Aggressive ETF (XNAV) and Motley Fool 100 Index ETF (TMFC). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, XNAV achieves a 18.25% return, which is significantly higher than TMFC's 3.00% return.

XNAV

• 1D: 1.18%
• 1M: -3.39%
• YTD: 18.25%
• 6M: 16.54%
• 1Y: 36.06%
• 3Y*: 22.81%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

TMFC

• 1D: -1.18%
• 1M: -5.11%
• YTD: 3.00%
• 6M: 1.76%
• 1Y: 17.02%
• 3Y*: 23.60%
• 5Y*: 13.80%
• 10Y*: —

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

XNAV vs. TMFC - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
XNAV FundX Aggressive ETF	18.25%	13.61%	25.44%	16.11%	8.67%
TMFC Motley Fool 100 Index ETF	3.00%	19.55%	35.17%	47.04%	1.55%

Correlation

The correlation between XNAV and TMFC is 0.80, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.80
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.90
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 17, 2022	0.86

The correlation between XNAV and TMFC has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.80 to 0.90 - a consistent structural relationship.

XNAV vs. TMFC - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	XNAV	TMFC
Technology	41.5%	44.5%
Industrials	10.6%	4.0%
Energy	10.5%	1.7%
Financial Services	7.8%	12.1%
Consumer Cyclical	6.7%	11.1%
Basic Materials	6.2%	0.6%
Communication Services	5.7%	16.6%
Healthcare	3.8%	4.4%
Consumer Defensive	3.3%	3.8%
Utilities	3.3%	0.4%
Real Estate	0.7%	0.9%

Return for Risk

XNAV vs. TMFC — Risk / Return Rank

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

XNAV

XNAV Risk / Return Rank: 68
XNAV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 69
XNAV Sortino Ratio Rank: 61
XNAV Omega Ratio Rank: 66
XNAV Calmar Ratio Rank: 71
XNAV Martin Ratio Rank: 74

TMFC

TMFC Risk / Return Rank: 34
TMFC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 38
TMFC Sortino Ratio Rank: 35
TMFC Omega Ratio Rank: 35
TMFC Calmar Ratio Rank: 29
TMFC Martin Ratio Rank: 36

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.

XNAV vs. TMFC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for FundX Aggressive ETF (XNAV) 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.

	XNAV	TMFC	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.95	1.20	+0.75
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.52	1.70	+0.82
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.35	1.21	+0.13
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.16	1.35	+1.81
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	12.32	4.84	+7.48

XNAV vs. TMFC - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XNAV Sharpe Ratio is 1.95, which is higher than the TMFC Sharpe Ratio of 1.20. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XNAV and TMFC, 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

XNAV vs. TMFC - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XNAV drawdown since its inception was -24.27%, smaller than the maximum TMFC drawdown of -33.06%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XNAV and TMFC.

Drawdown Indicators

	XNAV	TMFC	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-24.27%	-33.06%	+8.79%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-11.47%	-12.64%	+1.17%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-24.27%	-20.06%	-4.21%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-33.06%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-5.02%	-6.07%	+1.05%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.59%	-6.75%	+3.16%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.94%	3.53%	-0.59%

Volatility

XNAV vs. TMFC - Volatility Comparison

FundX Aggressive ETF (XNAV) has a higher volatility of 9.19% compared to Motley Fool 100 Index ETF (TMFC) at 5.47%. This indicates that XNAV'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.

Volatility by Period

	XNAV	TMFC	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	9.19%	5.47%	+3.72%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	16.06%	11.20%	+4.86%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	18.56%	14.22%	+4.34%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	19.14%	20.49%	-1.35%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	19.14%	21.99%	-2.85%

XNAV vs. TMFC - Expense Ratio Comparison

XNAV has a 1.30% expense ratio, which is higher than TMFC's 0.50% expense ratio.

Dividends

XNAV vs. TMFC - Dividend Comparison

XNAV's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.49%, more than TMFC's 0.14% yield.

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%
XNAV FundX Aggressive ETF	0.49%	0.58%	0.09%	1.21%	1.47%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both XNAV and TMFC in my portfolio?

XNAV and TMFC 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.

Which is riskier, XNAV or TMFC?

XNAV has higher volatility (9.19%) compared to TMFC (5.47%). In terms of maximum drawdown, XNAV dropped -24.27% vs TMFC's -33.06%.

Which ETF is better, XNAV or TMFC?

On 3-year performance, TMFC leads with 23.60% vs 22.81% for XNAV. On fees, TMFC is cheaper at 0.50% per year. On volatility, TMFC has been the lower-risk option at 5.47%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, XNAV or TMFC?

Over the 3-year period, TMFC has performed better with a 23.60% return vs 22.81%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, XNAV or TMFC?

TMFC is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 1.30% for XNAV.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, XNAV or TMFC?

XNAV has the higher dividend yield at 0.49%, compared with 0.14% for TMFC.

What is the main difference between XNAV and TMFC?

They also come from different issuers: FundX and Motley Fool. Their fees differ too: 1.30% for XNAV and 0.50% for TMFC.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

XNAV currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.95 vs 1.20), 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.