FBY vs. LQTI

Last updated Jun 26, 2026

FBY (YieldMax META Option Income ETF) and LQTI (FT Vest Investment Grade & Target Income ETF) are both Derivative Income funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, FBY returned -21.29% vs 4.82% for LQTI. At a 0.12 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. FBY charges 0.99%/yr vs 0.65%/yr for LQTI.

Performance

FBY vs. LQTI - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in YieldMax META Option Income ETF (FBY) and FT Vest Investment Grade & Target Income ETF (LQTI). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FBY achieves a -16.53% return, which is significantly lower than LQTI's 0.73% return.

FBY

• 1D: -2.49%
• 1M: -10.75%
• YTD: -16.53%
• 6M: -17.09%
• 1Y: -21.29%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

LQTI

• 1D: -0.10%
• 1M: 1.01%
• YTD: 0.73%
• 6M: 0.53%
• 1Y: 4.82%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

FBY vs. LQTI - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
FBY YieldMax META Option Income ETF	-16.53%	-12.34%
LQTI FT Vest Investment Grade & Target Income ETF	0.73%	6.59%

Correlation

The correlation between FBY and LQTI is 0.16, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.16
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 13, 2025	0.12

Return for Risk

FBY vs. LQTI — Risk / Return Rank

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

FBY

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

LQTI

LQTI Risk / Return Rank: 28
LQTI Sharpe Ratio Rank: 28
LQTI Sortino Ratio Rank: 27
LQTI Omega Ratio Rank: 26
LQTI Calmar Ratio Rank: 31
LQTI Martin Ratio Rank: 32

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.

FBY vs. LQTI - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for YieldMax META Option Income ETF (FBY) and FT Vest Investment Grade & Target Income ETF (LQTI). 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.

	FBY	LQTI	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.72	0.95	-1.67
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-0.88	1.39	-2.27
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.88	1.17	-0.28
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.72	1.42	-2.15
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-1.45	4.21	-5.66

FBY vs. LQTI - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FBY Sharpe Ratio is -0.72, which is lower than the LQTI Sharpe Ratio of 0.95. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FBY and LQTI, 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

FBY vs. LQTI - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FBY drawdown since its inception was -31.53%, which is greater than LQTI's maximum drawdown of -3.41%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FBY and LQTI.

Drawdown Indicators

	FBY	LQTI	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-31.53%	-3.41%	-28.12%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-29.50%	-3.41%	-26.09%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-28.27%	-0.87%	-27.40%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-8.14%	-0.90%	-7.24%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	14.66%	1.15%	+13.51%

Volatility

FBY vs. LQTI - Volatility Comparison

YieldMax META Option Income ETF (FBY) has a higher volatility of 10.42% compared to FT Vest Investment Grade & Target Income ETF (LQTI) at 1.40%. This indicates that FBY's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than LQTI based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FBY	LQTI	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	10.42%	1.40%	+9.02%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	23.44%	4.14%	+19.30%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	29.61%	5.09%	+24.52%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	28.66%	5.93%	+22.73%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	28.66%	5.93%	+22.73%

FBY vs. LQTI - Expense Ratio Comparison

FBY has a 0.99% expense ratio, which is higher than LQTI's 0.65% expense ratio.

Dividends

FBY vs. LQTI - Dividend Comparison

FBY's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 61.07%, more than LQTI's 9.06% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023
FBY YieldMax META Option Income ETF	61.07%	55.43%	53.89%	8.31%
LQTI FT Vest Investment Grade & Target Income ETF	9.06%	7.01%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FBY and LQTI in my portfolio?

FBY and LQTI have a correlation of 0.16, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, FBY or LQTI?

FBY has higher volatility (10.42%) compared to LQTI (1.40%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FBY dropped -31.53% vs LQTI's -3.41%.

Which ETF is better, FBY or LQTI?

On 1-year performance, LQTI leads with 4.82% vs -21.29% for FBY. On fees, LQTI is cheaper at 0.65% per year. On volatility, LQTI has been the lower-risk option at 1.40%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FBY or LQTI?

Over the 1-year period, LQTI has performed better with a 4.82% return vs -21.29%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FBY or LQTI?

LQTI is cheaper with a 0.65% expense ratio, compared with 0.99% for FBY.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, FBY or LQTI?

FBY has the higher dividend yield at 61.07%, compared with 9.06% for LQTI.

What is the main difference between FBY and LQTI?

They also come from different issuers: YieldMax and FT Vest. Their fees differ too: 0.99% for FBY and 0.65% for LQTI.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

LQTI currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.95 vs -0.72), 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.