FFLS vs. LBAY
FFLS (The 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 year, FFLS returned -0.45% vs 9.13% for LBAY. At a 0.01 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. FFLS charges 1.75%/yr vs 1.09%/yr for LBAY.
Performance
FFLS vs. LBAY - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, FFLS achieves a 0.41% return, which is significantly lower than LBAY's 6.83% return.
FFLS
- 1D
- 0.68%
- 1M
- 4.09%
- YTD
- 0.41%
- 6M
- 0.19%
- 1Y
- -0.45%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
LBAY
- 1D
- 0.43%
- 1M
- -0.47%
- YTD
- 6.83%
- 6M
- 9.25%
- 1Y
- 9.13%
- 3Y*
- 3.68%
- 5Y*
- 3.91%
- 10Y*
- —
FFLS vs. LBAY - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
FFLS The Future Fund Long/Short ETF | 0.41% | 7.49% | 17.71% | 2.03% |
LBAY Leatherback Long/Short Alternative Yield ETF | 6.83% | 4.08% | -3.49% | 1.63% |
Correlation
The correlation between FFLS and LBAY is -0.02, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | -0.02 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 22, 2023 | 0.01 |
FFLS vs. LBAY - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
FFLS
LBAY
Technology
Healthcare
Industrials
Communication Services
-
Consumer Cyclical
Energy
Real Estate
Consumer Defensive
Basic Materials
-
Utilities
-
Financial Services
Technology
FFLS
LBAY
Healthcare
FFLS
LBAY
Industrials
FFLS
LBAY
Communication Services
FFLS
LBAY
-
Consumer Cyclical
FFLS
LBAY
Energy
FFLS
LBAY
Real Estate
FFLS
LBAY
Consumer Defensive
FFLS
LBAY
Basic Materials
FFLS
-
LBAY
Utilities
FFLS
-
LBAY
Financial Services
FFLS
LBAY
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. LBAY — Risk / Return Rank
FFLS
LBAY
FFLS vs. LBAY - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for The 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.
| FFLS | LBAY | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.65 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -1.01 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.00 | 1.12 | -0.12 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.04 | 0.77 | -0.81 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -0.09 | 1.94 | -2.03 |
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 | LBAY | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | -0.05 | 0.60 | -0.65 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | — | 0.29 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.82 | 0.59 | +0.23 |
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.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| FFLS | LBAY | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -11.05% | -15.99% | +4.94% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -11.05% | -11.91% | +0.86% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -14.57% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -15.99% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -4.32% | -10.34% | +6.02% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -3.09% | -6.80% | +3.71% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 5.07% | 4.71% | +0.36% |
Volatility
FFLS vs. LBAY - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for The Future Fund Long/Short ETF (FFLS) is 3.51%, while Leatherback Long/Short Alternative Yield ETF (LBAY) has a volatility of 3.80%. 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.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| FFLS | LBAY | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 3.51% | 3.80% | -0.29% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 6.95% | 12.82% | -5.87% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 8.94% | 15.26% | -6.32% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 11.23% | 13.59% | -2.36% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 11.23% | 13.73% | -2.50% |
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 6.55%, more than LBAY's 3.79% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FFLS The Future Fund Long/Short ETF | 6.55% | 6.58% | 3.34% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
LBAY Leatherback Long/Short Alternative Yield ETF | 3.79% | 3.80% | 3.77% | 3.47% | 2.74% | 2.96% | 0.29% |
Frequently Asked Questions
FFLS and LBAY have a correlation of -0.02, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
LBAY has higher volatility (3.80%) compared to FFLS (3.51%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FFLS dropped -11.05% vs LBAY's -15.99%.
On 1-year performance, LBAY leads with 9.13% vs -0.45% for FFLS. On fees, LBAY is cheaper at 1.09% per year. On volatility, FFLS has been the lower-risk option at 3.51%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, LBAY has performed better with a 9.13% return vs -0.45%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
LBAY is cheaper with a 1.09% expense ratio, compared with 1.75% for FFLS.
FFLS has the higher dividend yield at 6.55%, compared with 3.79% for LBAY.
They also come from different issuers: The Future Fund and Toroso Investments. Their fees differ too: 1.75% for FFLS and 1.09% for LBAY.
LBAY currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.60 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 LBAY
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