FBY vs. QQQI
FBY (YieldMax META Option Income ETF) and QQQI (NEOS Nasdaq-100 High Income ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - FBY is a Derivative Income fund actively managed by YieldMax, while QQQI is a Nasdaq-100 fund actively managed by Neos. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, FBY returned -10.52% vs 31.46% for QQQI. A 0.60 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. FBY charges 0.99%/yr vs 0.68%/yr for QQQI.
Performance
FBY vs. QQQI - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, FBY achieves a -9.36% return, which is significantly lower than QQQI's 13.63% return.
FBY
- 1D
- -0.26%
- 1M
- -0.92%
- YTD
- -9.36%
- 6M
- -8.42%
- 1Y
- -10.52%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
QQQI
- 1D
- 0.38%
- 1M
- 6.99%
- YTD
- 13.63%
- 6M
- 13.39%
- 1Y
- 31.46%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
FBY vs. QQQI - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | |
|---|---|---|---|
FBY YieldMax META Option Income ETF | -9.36% | 1.98% | 34.57% |
QQQI NEOS Nasdaq-100 High Income ETF | 13.63% | 18.62% | 19.83% |
Correlation
The correlation between FBY and QQQI is 0.59, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.59 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 31, 2024 | 0.60 |
The correlation between FBY and QQQI has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.59 to 0.60 - a consistent structural relationship.
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
FBY vs. QQQI — Risk / Return Rank
FBY
QQQI
FBY vs. QQQI - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for YieldMax META Option Income ETF (FBY) and NEOS Nasdaq-100 High Income ETF (QQQI). 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.
| FBY | QQQI | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.37 | 2.44 | -2.80 |
Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.33 | 3.21 | -3.54 |
Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 0.95 | 1.45 | -0.49 |
Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.29 | 3.34 | -3.62 |
Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -0.63 | 15.01 | -15.64 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| FBY | QQQI | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | -0.37 | 2.44 | -2.80 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.58 | 1.34 | -0.76 |
Drawdowns
FBY vs. QQQI - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum FBY drawdown since its inception was -31.53%, which is greater than QQQI's maximum drawdown of -20.00%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FBY and QQQI.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| FBY | QQQI | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -31.53% | -20.00% | -11.53% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -29.50% | -9.61% | -19.89% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -22.10% | 0.00% | -22.10% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -7.80% | -2.20% | -5.60% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 13.35% | 2.14% | +11.21% |
Volatility
FBY vs. QQQI - Volatility Comparison
YieldMax META Option Income ETF (FBY) has a higher volatility of 6.15% compared to NEOS Nasdaq-100 High Income ETF (QQQI) at 2.67%. This indicates that FBY's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than QQQI based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| FBY | QQQI | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 6.15% | 2.67% | +3.48% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 21.94% | 9.85% | +12.09% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 28.73% | 12.98% | +15.75% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 28.46% | 17.08% | +11.38% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 28.46% | 17.08% | +11.38% |
FBY vs. QQQI - Expense Ratio Comparison
FBY has a 0.99% expense ratio, which is higher than QQQI's 0.68% expense ratio.
Dividends
FBY vs. QQQI - Dividend Comparison
FBY's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 57.90%, more than QQQI's 13.17% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
FBY YieldMax META Option Income ETF | 57.90% | 55.43% | 53.89% | 8.31% |
QQQI NEOS Nasdaq-100 High Income ETF | 13.17% | 13.82% | 12.85% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
FBY and QQQI have a correlation of 0.59, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
FBY has higher volatility (6.15%) compared to QQQI (2.67%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FBY dropped -31.53% vs QQQI's -20.00%.
On 1-year performance, QQQI leads with 31.46% vs -10.52% for FBY. On fees, QQQI is cheaper at 0.68% per year. On volatility, QQQI has been the lower-risk option at 2.67%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, QQQI has performed better with a 31.46% return vs -10.52%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
QQQI is cheaper with a 0.68% expense ratio, compared with 0.99% for FBY.
FBY has the higher dividend yield at 57.90%, compared with 13.17% for QQQI.
FBY is categorized as Derivative Income, while QQQI is Nasdaq-100. They also come from different issuers: YieldMax and Neos. Their fees differ too: 0.99% for FBY and 0.68% for QQQI.
QQQI currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.44 vs -0.37), 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.
Find the right allocation for FBY and QQQI
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