MFUT vs VOO
Cambria Chesapeake Pure Trend ETF vs Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
Quick Verdict
VOO has a lower expense ratio. MFUT delivered stronger 1-year returns. VOO offers more diversification with 505 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | MFUT | VOO | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.89% | 0.03% | |
| AUM | $41M | $979.0B | |
| Dividend Yield | 0.00% | 1.09% | |
| Holdings | 143 | 509 | |
| YTD Return | +16.82% | +13.44% | |
| 1Y Return | +31.45% | +22.62% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | - | +21.47% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | - | +13.27% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 14.6% | 14.1% | |
| Max Drawdown | -29.3% | -34.3% | |
| Fund Family | Cambria Investment Management | Vanguard (US) | |
| Category | Allocation/Balanced | Equity | |
| Inception | May 29, 2024 | Sep 7, 2010 |
MFUT vs VOO Performance
Cambria Chesapeake Pure Trend ETF (MFUT) is a ETF from Cambria Investment Management and Vanguard S&P 500 ETF (VOO) is a ETF from Vanguard (US). Over the past year MFUT returned +31.45% while VOO returned +22.62%. Year to date, MFUT is up 16.82% versus a gain of 13.44% for VOO.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
MFUT has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 14.6% compared with 14.1% for VOO. Lower volatility generally means a smoother ride, though it often comes with lower long-run returns.
The deepest peak-to-trough decline in our data was -29.3% for MFUT and -34.3% for VOO. Drawdown depth is worth weighing if you expect to sell during market stress rather than ride it out.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.47. They move independently enough that combining them can meaningfully diversify a portfolio.
Fees and Cost Over Time
MFUT charges 0.89% per year while VOO charges 0.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $89 vs $3 annually, a gap of $86 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, MFUT currently yields 0.00% against 1.09% for VOO.
Holdings Overlap
MFUT and VOO share 43 holdings out of 525 unique holdings combined, representing a 10.6% weight overlap.
Moderate overlap means holding both could provide meaningful diversification benefits.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, MFUT or VOO?
MFUT has an expense ratio of 0.89% while VOO charges 0.03%. VOO is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $86 per year of difference.
Which performed better, MFUT or VOO?
Over the past year MFUT returned +31.45% vs +22.62% for VOO, so MFUT leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (2 years), MFUT annualized -1.46% vs +13.55% for VOO. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, MFUT or VOO?
MFUT has been the more volatile fund at 14.6% annualized versus 14.1% for VOO. Worst drawdown: MFUT -29.3% vs VOO -34.3%.
Should I hold both MFUT and VOO?
MFUT and VOO have a monthly-return correlation of 0.47, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between MFUT and VOO?
MFUT and VOO share 43 common holdings with a 10.6% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 525 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, MFUT or VOO?
MFUT yields 0.00% while VOO yields 1.09%, so VOO currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Popular ETF Comparisons
Get Full ETF Analytics
Access complete holdings data, overlap analysis, screener tools, and more with FundXLS.