FFLS vs. CSM
FFLS (The Future Fund Long/Short ETF) and CSM (Proshares Large Cap Core Plus) are both Long-Short funds. FFLS is actively managed, while CSM is passively managed. Over the past year, FFLS returned -0.45% vs 28.48% for CSM. A 0.62 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. FFLS charges 1.75%/yr vs 0.45%/yr for CSM.
Performance
FFLS vs. CSM - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, FFLS achieves a -0.26% return, which is significantly lower than CSM's 8.62% return.
FFLS
- 1D
- -0.63%
- 1M
- 2.89%
- YTD
- -0.26%
- 6M
- -0.66%
- 1Y
- -0.45%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
CSM
- 1D
- -0.84%
- 1M
- 4.86%
- YTD
- 8.62%
- 6M
- 9.99%
- 1Y
- 28.48%
- 3Y*
- 22.04%
- 5Y*
- 13.38%
- 10Y*
- 14.36%
FFLS vs. CSM - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
FFLS The Future Fund Long/Short ETF | -0.26% | 7.49% | 17.71% | 2.03% |
CSM Proshares Large Cap Core Plus | 8.62% | 21.84% | 22.09% | 10.69% |
Correlation
The correlation between FFLS and CSM is 0.43, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.43 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 22, 2023 | 0.62 |
The correlation between FFLS and CSM shifts across timeframes, from 0.43 (1 year) to 0.62 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
FFLS vs. CSM - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
FFLS
CSM
Technology
Healthcare
Industrials
Communication Services
Consumer Cyclical
Energy
Real Estate
Consumer Defensive
Basic Materials
-
Utilities
-
Financial Services
Technology
FFLS
CSM
Healthcare
FFLS
CSM
Industrials
FFLS
CSM
Communication Services
FFLS
CSM
Consumer Cyclical
FFLS
CSM
Energy
FFLS
CSM
Real Estate
FFLS
CSM
Consumer Defensive
FFLS
CSM
Basic Materials
FFLS
-
CSM
Utilities
FFLS
-
CSM
Financial Services
FFLS
CSM
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. CSM — Risk / Return Rank
FFLS
CSM
FFLS vs. CSM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for The Future Fund Long/Short ETF (FFLS) and Proshares Large Cap Core Plus (CSM). 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.
| FFLS | CSM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -2.45 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -3.31 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.00 | 1.42 | -0.42 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.04 | 3.04 | -3.08 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -0.09 | 13.25 | -13.34 |
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
| FFLS | CSM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | -0.05 | 2.40 | -2.45 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | — | 0.79 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | — | 0.78 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.80 | 0.86 | -0.06 |
Drawdowns
FFLS vs. CSM - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum FFLS drawdown since its inception was -11.05%, smaller than the maximum CSM drawdown of -36.11%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FFLS and CSM.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| FFLS | CSM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -11.05% | -36.11% | +25.06% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -11.05% | -9.40% | -1.65% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -18.30% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -23.82% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -36.11% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -4.96% | -1.18% | -3.78% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -3.09% | -4.04% | +0.95% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 5.07% | 2.15% | +2.92% |
Volatility
FFLS vs. CSM - Volatility Comparison
The Future Fund Long/Short ETF (FFLS) has a higher volatility of 3.54% compared to Proshares Large Cap Core Plus (CSM) at 2.85%. This indicates that FFLS's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CSM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| FFLS | CSM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 3.54% | 2.85% | +0.69% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 6.92% | 8.81% | -1.89% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 8.94% | 11.95% | -3.01% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 11.23% | 17.11% | -5.88% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 11.23% | 18.38% | -7.15% |
FFLS vs. CSM - Expense Ratio Comparison
FFLS has a 1.75% expense ratio, which is higher than CSM's 0.45% expense ratio.
Dividends
FFLS vs. CSM - Dividend Comparison
FFLS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 6.59%, more than CSM's 1.01% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CSM Proshares Large Cap Core Plus | 1.01% | 1.04% | 1.06% | 1.17% | 1.37% | 0.78% | 1.21% | 1.41% | 1.54% | 1.28% | 1.49% | 1.67% |
FFLS The Future Fund Long/Short ETF | 6.59% | 6.58% | 3.34% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
FFLS and CSM have a correlation of 0.43, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
FFLS has higher volatility (3.54%) compared to CSM (2.85%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FFLS dropped -11.05% vs CSM's -36.11%.
On 1-year performance, CSM leads with 28.48% vs -0.45% for FFLS. On fees, CSM is cheaper at 0.45% per year. On volatility, CSM has been the lower-risk option at 2.85%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, CSM has performed better with a 28.48% return vs -0.45%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
CSM is cheaper with a 0.45% expense ratio, compared with 1.75% for FFLS.
FFLS has the higher dividend yield at 6.59%, compared with 1.01% for CSM.
They also come from different issuers: The Future Fund and ProShares. Their fees differ too: 1.75% for FFLS and 0.45% for CSM.
CSM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.40 vs -0.05), 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 CSM
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