FFLS vs. LBAY

Last updated Aug 4, 2026

FFLS (Future Fund Long/Short ETF) and LBAY (Leatherback Long/Short Alternative Yield ETF) are both Long-Short funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past 3 years, FFLS returned 10.27%/yr vs 2.66%/yr for LBAY. Their -0.04 correlation means they have often moved in opposite directions in the past. FFLS charges 1.75%/yr vs 1.09%/yr for LBAY.

Performance

FFLS vs. LBAY - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Future Fund Long/Short ETF (FFLS) and Leatherback Long/Short Alternative Yield ETF (LBAY). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FFLS achieves a 0.09% return, which is significantly lower than LBAY's 9.88% 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%

LBAY

• 1D: -0.72%
• 1M: 1.44%
• 6M: 3.68%
• YTD: 9.88%
• 1Y: 11.19%
• 3Y*: 2.66%
• 5Y*: 5.92%
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 8.43%

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
FFLS Future Fund Long/Short ETF	$154.32K	$128.25K	$158.86K
LBAY Leatherback Long/Short Alternative Yield ETF	$60.22K	$42.11K	$39.32K

FFLS vs. LBAY - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
FFLS Future Fund Long/Short ETF	0.09%	7.49%	17.71%	0.79%
LBAY Leatherback Long/Short Alternative Yield ETF	9.88%	4.08%	-3.49%	1.67%

Correlation

The correlation between FFLS and LBAY is -0.13, meaning they have often moved in opposite directions in the past. This relationship can weaken or reverse as market conditions change.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	-0.13
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history.	-0.04
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 21, 2023	-0.04

Return for Risk

FFLS vs. LBAY — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

FFLS

FFLS Risk / Return Rank: 8
FFLS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8
FFLS Sortino Ratio Rank: 7
FFLS Omega Ratio Rank: 7
FFLS Calmar Ratio Rank: 8
FFLS Martin Ratio Rank: 8

LBAY

LBAY Risk / Return Rank: 27
LBAY Sharpe Ratio Rank: 28
LBAY Sortino Ratio Rank: 29
LBAY Omega Ratio Rank: 26
LBAY Calmar Ratio Rank: 26
LBAY Martin Ratio Rank: 24

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

FFLS vs. LBAY - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Future Fund Long/Short ETF (FFLS) and Leatherback Long/Short Alternative Yield ETF (LBAY). 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	LBAY	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.21	0.66	-0.87
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-0.22	1.09	-1.31
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.97	1.12	-0.15
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.19	0.83	-1.02
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-0.38	1.83	-2.21

FFLS vs. LBAY - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FFLS Sharpe Ratio is -0.21, which is lower than the LBAY Sharpe Ratio of 0.66. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FFLS and LBAY, 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

FFLS vs. LBAY - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FFLS drawdown since its inception was -11.05%, smaller than the maximum LBAY drawdown of -15.99%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FFLS and LBAY.

Drawdown Indicators

	FFLS	LBAY	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-11.05%	-15.99%	+4.94%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-11.05%	-13.61%	+2.56%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-11.05%	-14.57%	+3.52%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-15.99%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-4.62%	-7.78%	+3.16%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.27%	-6.88%	+3.61%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	5.68%	6.12%	-0.44%

Volatility

FFLS vs. LBAY - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Future Fund Long/Short ETF (FFLS) is 4.41%, while Leatherback Long/Short Alternative Yield ETF (LBAY) has a volatility of 5.87%. This indicates that FFLS experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than LBAY based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FFLS	LBAY	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.41%	5.87%	-1.46%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	8.88%	13.85%	-4.97%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	10.47%	16.96%	-6.49%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	11.50%	13.78%	-2.28%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	11.50%	13.98%	-2.48%

FFLS vs. LBAY - Expense Ratio Comparison

FFLS has a 1.75% expense ratio, which is higher than LBAY's 1.09% expense ratio.

Dividends

FFLS vs. LBAY - Dividend Comparison

FFLS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 6.57%, more than LBAY's 3.77% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
FFLS Future Fund Long/Short ETF	6.57%	6.58%	3.34%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
LBAY Leatherback Long/Short Alternative Yield ETF	3.77%	3.80%	3.77%	3.47%	2.74%	2.96%	0.29%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FFLS and LBAY in my portfolio?

FFLS and LBAY have a correlation of -0.13, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, FFLS or LBAY?

LBAY has higher volatility (5.87%) compared to FFLS (4.41%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FFLS dropped -11.05% vs LBAY's -15.99%.

Which ETF is better, FFLS or LBAY?

On 3-year performance, FFLS leads with 10.27% vs 2.66% for LBAY. On fees, LBAY is cheaper at 1.09% 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.

Which ETF has performed better, FFLS or LBAY?

Over the 3-year period, FFLS has performed better with a 10.27% return vs 2.66%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FFLS or LBAY?

LBAY is cheaper with a 1.09% expense ratio, compared with 1.75% for FFLS.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, FFLS or LBAY?

FFLS has the higher dividend yield at 6.57%, compared with 3.77% for LBAY.

What is the main difference between FFLS and LBAY?

They also come from different issuers: Future Fund and Toroso Investments. Their fees differ too: 1.75% for FFLS and 1.09% for LBAY.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

LBAY currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.66 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.