CIFU vs. QTAP
CIFU (T-REX 2X Long CIFR Daily Target ETF) and QTAP (Innovator Growth Accelerated Plus ETF - April) are both Leveraged Equities funds. Both are actively managed. At a 0.42 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. CIFU charges 1.50%/yr vs 0.79%/yr for QTAP.
Performance
CIFU vs. QTAP - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, CIFU achieves a 94.41% return, which is significantly higher than QTAP's 12.83% return.
CIFU
- 1D
- -4.06%
- 1M
- 42.63%
- YTD
- 94.41%
- 6M
- 64.26%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
QTAP
- 1D
- -1.14%
- 1M
- -0.91%
- YTD
- 12.83%
- 6M
- 13.01%
- 1Y
- 22.41%
- 3Y*
- 19.78%
- 5Y*
- 12.65%
- 10Y*
- —
CIFU vs. QTAP - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
CIFU T-REX 2X Long CIFR Daily Target ETF | 94.41% | -13.41% |
QTAP Innovator Growth Accelerated Plus ETF - April | 12.83% | 3.03% |
Correlation
The correlation between CIFU and QTAP 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 Nov 21, 2025 | 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
CIFU vs. QTAP — Risk / Return Rank
CIFU
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
QTAP
CIFU vs. QTAP - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for T-REX 2X Long CIFR Daily Target ETF (CIFU) and Innovator Growth Accelerated Plus ETF - April (QTAP). 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.
| CIFU | QTAP | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | — | 1.94 | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | — | 9.04 | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | — | 52.85 | — |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
CIFU vs. QTAP - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CIFU drawdown since its inception was -77.20%, which is greater than QTAP's maximum drawdown of -29.44%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CIFU and QTAP.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| CIFU | QTAP | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -77.20% | -29.44% | -47.76% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | — | -2.49% | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -13.03% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -29.44% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -10.48% | -1.70% | -8.78% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -42.93% | -4.99% | -37.94% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | — | 0.43% | — |
Volatility
CIFU vs. QTAP - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| CIFU | QTAP | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | — | 3.03% | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | — | 4.94% | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 207.07% | 6.12% | +200.95% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 207.07% | 18.92% | +188.15% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 207.07% | 18.72% | +188.35% |
CIFU vs. QTAP - Expense Ratio Comparison
CIFU has a 1.50% expense ratio, which is higher than QTAP's 0.79% expense ratio.
Dividends
CIFU vs. QTAP - Dividend Comparison
Neither CIFU nor QTAP has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
CIFU and QTAP 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, QTAP is cheaper at 0.79% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
QTAP is cheaper with a 0.79% expense ratio, compared with 1.50% for CIFU.
CIFU and QTAP have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.
They also come from different issuers: REX and Innovator. Their fees differ too: 1.50% for CIFU and 0.79% for QTAP.
Find the right allocation for CIFU and QTAP
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