MFSG vs TFGZ
MFS Active Growth ETF vs Thornburg Focus Growth Fund ETF
Which is better, MFSG or TFGZ?
TFGZ has been ahead.
MFSG has a lower expense ratio. TFGZ led over 1Y. TFGZ is less concentrated, with 49.4% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 53.3%.
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 | MFSG | TFGZ |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.49%Best | 0.79% |
| AUM | $406M | $12M |
| Dividend Yield | 0.06% | 0.00% |
| Holdings | 69 | 43 |
| YTD Return | +7.53% | +16.33%Best |
| 1Y Return | +9.18% | - |
| Top 10 Weight | 53.3% | 49.4%Best |
| Fund Family | MFS Investment Management | Thornburg Investment Management |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Growth | Large Cap Growth |
| Inception | Dec 5, 2024 | Apr 1, 2026 |
Not shown on this pair: 3Y Return (annualized), 5Y Return (annualized), Volatility (annualized), Max Drawdown, $10,000 over the window.
MFSG vs TFGZ 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 is available from the range buttons; it is not the opening view here because over the whole period one of these two funds moves so much further than the other that its line would sit flat on the axis.
MFSG vs TFGZ Performance
MFS Active Growth ETF (MFSG) is an ETF from MFS Investment Management and Thornburg Focus Growth Fund ETF (TFGZ) is an ETF from Thornburg Investment Management. Year to date, MFSG is up 7.53% versus a gain of 16.33% for TFGZ.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Fees and Cost Over Time
MFSG charges 0.49% per year while TFGZ charges 0.79%. On a $10,000 position that is $49 vs $79 annually, a gap of $30 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, MFSG currently yields 0.06% against 0.00% for TFGZ.
Holdings Overlap
26.4% of MFSG's money is in holdings TFGZ also owns. 37.2% of TFGZ's money is in holdings MFSG also owns.
The two portfolios partly overlap.
7 positions in common, counted across the 67 positions we hold weights for in MFSG and 42 in TFGZ, against full books of 69 and 43.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 28 positions for TFGZ that do not appear in our book for MFSG (49.1% of the fund), and 56 for MFSG that do not appear in TFGZ (69.1%).
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.
Top Shared Holdings
37.2% of TFGZ is already inside MFSG.
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, MFSG or TFGZ?
MFSG has an expense ratio of 0.49% while TFGZ charges 0.79%. MFSG is the cheaper option, by $30 a year on a $10,000 investment.
What is the holdings overlap between MFSG and TFGZ?
37.2% of TFGZ's money is in holdings MFSG also owns. 37.2% of TFGZ's is in holdings MFSG also owns. They hold 7 positions in common, counted across the 67 positions we hold weights for in MFSG and 42 in TFGZ.
Which pays a higher dividend, MFSG or TFGZ?
MFSG yields 0.06% while TFGZ yields 0.00%, so MFSG currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is TFGZ better than MFSG?
MFSG has a lower expense ratio. TFGZ led over 1Y. TFGZ is less concentrated, with 49.4% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 53.3%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.