BERZ vs. FLYD

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

BERZ (MicroSectors Solactive FANG & Innovation -3X Inverse Leveraged ETN) and FLYD (MicroSectors Travel -3X Inverse Leveraged ETNs) are both Inverse Equities funds - BERZ tracks the Solactive FANG Innovation Index while FLYD tracks the MerQube MicroSectors U.S. Travel Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, BERZ returned -74.69%/yr vs -55.36%/yr for FLYD. A 0.61 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. Both charge a 0.95% expense ratio.

Performance

BERZ vs. FLYD - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in MicroSectors Solactive FANG & Innovation -3X Inverse Leveraged ETN (BERZ) and MicroSectors Travel -3X Inverse Leveraged ETNs (FLYD). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BERZ achieves a -55.66% return, which is significantly lower than FLYD's -26.01% return.

BERZ

• 1D: 11.73%
• 1M: 4.71%
• YTD: -55.66%
• 6M: -53.62%
• 1Y: -80.66%
• 3Y*: -74.69%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

FLYD

• 1D: -0.28%
• 1M: -24.44%
• YTD: -26.01%
• 6M: -22.75%
• 1Y: -55.79%
• 3Y*: -55.36%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

BERZ vs. FLYD - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
BERZ MicroSectors Solactive FANG & Innovation -3X Inverse Leveraged ETN	-55.66%	-78.81%	-65.95%	-89.12%	-13.80%
FLYD MicroSectors Travel -3X Inverse Leveraged ETNs	-26.01%	-60.42%	-54.13%	-75.14%	-46.63%

Correlation

The correlation between BERZ and FLYD is 0.48, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.48
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.55
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 22, 2022	0.61

The correlation between BERZ and FLYD shifts across timeframes, from 0.48 (1 year) to 0.61 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

BERZ vs. FLYD - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	BERZ	FLYD
Technology	60.8%	13.2%
Communication Services	26.2%	7.8%
Financial Services	13.3%	-
Consumer Cyclical	13.0%	51.1%
Basic Materials	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Energy	-	-
Healthcare	-	-
Industrials	-	27.8%
Real Estate	-	0.1%
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

BERZ vs. FLYD — Risk / Return Rank

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

BERZ

BERZ Risk / Return Rank: 1
BERZ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1
BERZ Sortino Ratio Rank: 0
BERZ Omega Ratio Rank: 0
BERZ Calmar Ratio Rank: 1
BERZ Martin Ratio Rank: 1

FLYD

FLYD Risk / Return Rank: 2
FLYD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3
FLYD Sortino Ratio Rank: 4
FLYD Omega Ratio Rank: 3
FLYD Calmar Ratio Rank: 0
FLYD Martin Ratio Rank: 0

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.

BERZ vs. FLYD - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for MicroSectors Solactive FANG & Innovation -3X Inverse Leveraged ETN (BERZ) and MicroSectors Travel -3X Inverse Leveraged ETNs (FLYD). 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.

	BERZ	FLYD	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.99	-0.74	-0.25
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-2.23	-0.91	-1.32
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.77	0.89	-0.13
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.96	-1.04	+0.08
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-1.56	-1.89	+0.33

BERZ vs. FLYD - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BERZ Sharpe Ratio is -0.99, which is lower than the FLYD Sharpe Ratio of -0.74. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BERZ and FLYD, 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

BERZ vs. FLYD - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BERZ drawdown since its inception was -99.80%, roughly equal to the maximum FLYD drawdown of -98.34%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BERZ and FLYD.

Drawdown Indicators

	BERZ	FLYD	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-99.80%	-98.34%	-1.46%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-84.60%	-53.82%	-30.78%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-98.87%	-94.22%	-4.65%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-99.73%	-98.29%	-1.44%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-71.81%	-83.23%	+11.42%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	54.31%	34.14%	+20.17%

Volatility

BERZ vs. FLYD - Volatility Comparison

MicroSectors Solactive FANG & Innovation -3X Inverse Leveraged ETN (BERZ) has a higher volatility of 34.10% compared to MicroSectors Travel -3X Inverse Leveraged ETNs (FLYD) at 24.52%. This indicates that BERZ's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FLYD based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	BERZ	FLYD	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	34.10%	24.52%	+9.58%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	63.77%	62.38%	+1.39%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	81.37%	75.78%	+5.59%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	92.80%	83.76%	+9.04%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	92.80%	83.76%	+9.04%

BERZ vs. FLYD - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both BERZ and FLYD have an expense ratio of 0.95%.

Dividends

BERZ vs. FLYD - Dividend Comparison

Neither BERZ nor FLYD has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both BERZ and FLYD in my portfolio?

BERZ and FLYD have a correlation of 0.48, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, BERZ or FLYD?

BERZ has higher volatility (34.10%) compared to FLYD (24.52%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BERZ dropped -99.80% vs FLYD's -98.34%.

Which ETF is better, BERZ or FLYD?

On 3-year performance, FLYD leads with -55.36% vs -74.69% for BERZ. Both ETFs have the same 0.95% expense ratio. On volatility, FLYD has been the lower-risk option at 24.52%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, BERZ or FLYD?

Over the 3-year period, FLYD has performed better with a -55.36% return vs -74.69%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, BERZ or FLYD?

BERZ and FLYD have the same expense ratio: 0.95% per year.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, BERZ or FLYD?

BERZ and FLYD have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

What is the main difference between BERZ and FLYD?

BERZ tracks Solactive FANG Innovation Index, while FLYD tracks MerQube MicroSectors U.S. Travel Index. They also come from different issuers: BMO and REX.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FLYD currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (-0.74 vs -0.99), 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.