AMA vs. XDSQ
AMA (Defiance Daily Target 2X Long AMAT ETF) and XDSQ (Innovator US Equity Accelerated ETF) are both Leveraged Equities funds. Both are actively managed. At a 0.42 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. AMA charges 1.29%/yr vs 0.79%/yr for XDSQ.
Performance
AMA vs. XDSQ - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
AMA
- 1D
- 8.42%
- 1M
- 136.44%
- YTD
- —
- 6M
- —
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
XDSQ
- 1D
- -0.01%
- 1M
- 0.48%
- YTD
- 3.21%
- 6M
- 1.85%
- 1Y
- 14.92%
- 3Y*
- 14.42%
- 5Y*
- 9.59%
- 10Y*
- —
AMA vs. XDSQ - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | |
|---|---|
AMA Defiance Daily Target 2X Long AMAT ETF | 140.44% |
XDSQ Innovator US Equity Accelerated ETF | 0.78% |
Correlation
The correlation between AMA and XDSQ is 0.42, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 26, 2026 | 0.42 |
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
AMA vs. XDSQ — Risk / Return Rank
AMA
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
XDSQ
AMA vs. XDSQ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Defiance Daily Target 2X Long AMAT ETF (AMA) and Innovator US Equity Accelerated ETF (XDSQ). 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.
| AMA | XDSQ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | — | 1.30 | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | — | 1.56 | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | — | 7.44 | — |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
AMA vs. XDSQ - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum AMA drawdown since its inception was -19.35%, smaller than the maximum XDSQ drawdown of -26.06%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for AMA and XDSQ.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| AMA | XDSQ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -19.35% | -26.06% | +6.71% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | — | -9.60% | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -19.15% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -26.06% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | 0.00% | -0.01% | +0.01% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -3.68% | -4.89% | +1.21% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | — | 2.01% | — |
Volatility
AMA vs. XDSQ - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| AMA | XDSQ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | — | 0.60% | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | — | 7.94% | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 181.63% | 10.50% | +171.13% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 181.63% | 15.28% | +166.35% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 181.63% | 14.99% | +166.64% |
AMA vs. XDSQ - Expense Ratio Comparison
AMA has a 1.29% expense ratio, which is higher than XDSQ's 0.79% expense ratio.
Dividends
AMA vs. XDSQ - Dividend Comparison
Neither AMA nor XDSQ has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
AMA and XDSQ have a correlation of 0.42, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, XDSQ is cheaper at 0.79% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
XDSQ is cheaper with a 0.79% expense ratio, compared with 1.29% for AMA.
AMA and XDSQ have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.
They also come from different issuers: Defiance and Innovator. Their fees differ too: 1.29% for AMA and 0.79% for XDSQ.
Find the right allocation for AMA and XDSQ
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