FLV vs MAVF
American Century Focused Large Cap Value ETF vs Matrix Advisors Value ETF
Which is better, FLV or MAVF?
MAVF has been ahead.
FLV has a lower expense ratio. MAVF led over 1Y and the full window. FLV is less concentrated, with 32.6% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 54.6%.
MarketXLS is not an investment adviser. This comparison is generated automatically from market data and is for information only. A Best mark means the better reading on that one measure, not a recommendation to buy.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | FLV | MAVF |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.42%Best | 0.75% |
| AUM | $379M | $93M |
| Dividend Yield | 1.73% | 0.37% |
| Holdings | 56 | 29 |
| YTD Return | +12.50% | +13.01%Best |
| 1Y Return | +16.84% | +19.46%Best |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +16.33% | - |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +9.83% | - |
| Volatility (annualized) | 11.6%Best | 14.3% |
| Max Drawdown | -11.6%Best | -16.4% |
| $10,000 over 1.6 years | $12,351 | $13,491Best |
| Top 10 Weight | 32.6%Best | 54.6% |
| Fund Family | American Century ETFs | Matrix Asset Advisors |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Value | Large Cap Value |
| Inception | Mar 31, 2020 | Sep 16, 1983 |
Volatility and max drawdown, and the $10,000 over 1.6 years row, are measured over the window both funds cover: Feb 24, 2025 to Oct 14, 2026 (1.6 years).
FLV vs MAVF growth
Month-end closes. Both lines start at 0% in the first month shown, so the gap between them is the difference in growth across that window. The full view covers the 1.6 years both funds cover.
FLV vs MAVF Performance
American Century Focused Large Cap Value ETF (FLV) is an ETF from American Century ETFs and Matrix Advisors Value ETF (MAVF) is an ETF from Matrix Asset Advisors. Over the past year FLV returned +16.84% while MAVF returned +19.46%. Year to date, FLV is up 12.50% versus a gain of 13.01% for MAVF.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
MAVF has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 14.3% compared with 11.6% for FLV. 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 -11.6% for FLV and -16.4% for MAVF. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.60. They move together some of the time, and apart the rest.
Fees and Cost Over Time
FLV charges 0.42% per year while MAVF charges 0.75%. On a $10,000 position that is $42 vs $75 annually, a gap of $33 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, FLV currently yields 1.73% against 0.37% for MAVF.
Holdings Overlap
17.9% of FLV's money is in holdings MAVF also owns. 35.9% of MAVF's money is in holdings FLV also owns.
The two portfolios partly overlap.
The two holdings books were reported 93 days apart, FLV as of Jun 30, 2026 and MAVF as of Oct 1, 2026, so some of the difference between them is the time between the two reports rather than the funds.
7 positions in common, counted across the 52 positions we hold weights for in FLV and 27 in MAVF, against full books of 56 and 29.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 20 positions for MAVF that do not appear in our book for FLV (64.1% of the fund), and 40 for FLV that do not appear in MAVF (75.3%).
Some of those will be the same company recorded under a different code in one of the two books, so the real difference in what you would own is no larger than this and may be smaller. We do not name the individual positions here for that reason.
35.9% of MAVF is already inside FLV.
You probably hold more than these two. Add the rest and see how much of the whole book is the same companies twice.
Free for up to 10 holdings. No account needed.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, FLV or MAVF?
FLV has an expense ratio of 0.42% while MAVF charges 0.75%. FLV is the cheaper option, by $33 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, FLV or MAVF?
Over the past year FLV returned +16.84% vs +19.46% for MAVF, so MAVF leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (2 years), FLV annualized +14.11% vs +20.58% for MAVF. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, FLV or MAVF?
MAVF has been the more volatile fund at 14.3% annualized versus 11.6% for FLV. Worst drawdown: FLV -11.6% vs MAVF -16.4%.
Should I hold both FLV and MAVF?
FLV and MAVF have a monthly-return correlation of 0.60, so their returns are far enough apart for the mix to behave differently from either one alone. This is information, not a recommendation.
What is the holdings overlap between FLV and MAVF?
35.9% of MAVF's money is in holdings FLV also owns. 35.9% of MAVF's is in holdings FLV also owns. They hold 7 positions in common, counted across the 52 positions we hold weights for in FLV and 27 in MAVF.
Which pays a higher dividend, FLV or MAVF?
FLV yields 1.73% while MAVF yields 0.37%, so FLV currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is MAVF better than FLV?
FLV has a lower expense ratio. MAVF led over 1Y and the full window. FLV is less concentrated, with 32.6% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 54.6%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.