FFLS vs. CLIX
FFLS (Future Fund Long/Short ETF) and CLIX (ProShares Long Online/Short Stores ETF) are both Long-Short funds. FFLS is actively managed, while CLIX is passively managed. Over the past 3 years, FFLS returned 10.27%/yr vs 17.63%/yr for CLIX. Their 0.54 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. FFLS charges 1.75%/yr vs 0.65%/yr for CLIX.
Performance
FFLS vs. CLIX - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, FFLS achieves a 0.09% return, which is significantly lower than CLIX's 1.07% return.
FFLS
- 1D
- 1.47%
- 1M
- -0.49%
- 6M
- -0.32%
- YTD
- 0.09%
- 1Y
- -2.14%
- 3Y*
- 10.27%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- 8.14%
CLIX
- 1D
- 1.65%
- 1M
- 7.82%
- 6M
- 2.99%
- YTD
- 1.07%
- 1Y
- 13.88%
- 3Y*
- 17.63%
- 5Y*
- -4.07%
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- 5.19%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $45.47K | $49.46K | $33.10K | |
| $154.32K | $128.25K | $158.86K |
FFLS vs. CLIX - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
FFLS Future Fund Long/Short ETF | 0.09% | 7.49% | 17.71% | 0.79% |
CLIX ProShares Long Online/Short Stores ETF | 1.07% | 32.81% | 20.73% | 9.03% |
Correlation
The correlation between FFLS and CLIX is 0.44, which is low. Their historical price movements had little consistent relationship.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most. | 0.44 |
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history. | 0.54 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 21, 2023 | 0.54 |
The correlation between FFLS and CLIX has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.44 to 0.54 - 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
FFLS vs. CLIX — Risk / Return Rank
FFLS
CLIX
FFLS vs. CLIX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Future Fund Long/Short ETF (FFLS) and ProShares Long Online/Short Stores ETF (CLIX). 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.
| FFLS | CLIX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.84 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -1.23 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 0.97 | 1.12 | -0.14 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.19 | 0.71 | -0.91 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -0.38 | 1.71 | -2.09 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
FFLS vs. CLIX - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum FFLS drawdown since its inception was -11.05%, smaller than the maximum CLIX drawdown of -73.21%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FFLS and CLIX.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| FFLS | CLIX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -11.05% | -73.21% | +62.16% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -11.05% | -19.57% | +8.52% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -11.05% | -21.18% | +10.13% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -63.44% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -4.62% | -40.29% | +35.67% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -3.27% | -34.87% | +31.60% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 5.68% | 8.12% | -2.44% |
Volatility
FFLS vs. CLIX - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Future Fund Long/Short ETF (FFLS) is 4.41%, while ProShares Long Online/Short Stores ETF (CLIX) has a volatility of 6.94%. This indicates that FFLS experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CLIX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| FFLS | CLIX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 4.41% | 6.94% | -2.53% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 8.88% | 17.25% | -8.37% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 10.47% | 21.95% | -11.48% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 11.50% | 26.88% | -15.38% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 11.50% | 25.89% | -14.39% |
FFLS vs. CLIX - Expense Ratio Comparison
FFLS has a 1.75% expense ratio, which is higher than CLIX's 0.65% expense ratio.
Dividends
FFLS vs. CLIX - Dividend Comparison
FFLS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 6.57%, more than CLIX's 0.52% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CLIX ProShares Long Online/Short Stores ETF | 0.52% | 0.46% | 0.46% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 1.33% |
FFLS Future Fund Long/Short ETF | 6.57% | 6.58% | 3.34% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
FFLS and CLIX have a correlation of 0.44, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
CLIX has higher volatility (6.94%) compared to FFLS (4.41%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FFLS dropped -11.05% vs CLIX's -73.21%.
On 3-year performance, CLIX leads with 17.63% vs 10.27% for FFLS. On fees, CLIX is cheaper at 0.65% per year. On volatility, FFLS has been the lower-risk option at 4.41%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 3-year period, CLIX has performed better with a 17.63% return vs 10.27%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
CLIX is cheaper with a 0.65% expense ratio, compared with 1.75% for FFLS.
FFLS has the higher dividend yield at 6.57%, compared with 0.52% for CLIX.
They also come from different issuers: Future Fund and ProShares. Their fees differ too: 1.75% for FFLS and 0.65% for CLIX.
CLIX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.64 vs -0.21), 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 FFLS and CLIX
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