FFLS vs. QAI
FFLS (Future Fund Long/Short ETF) and QAI (NYLI Hedge Multi-Strategy Tracker ETF) are both Long-Short funds. FFLS is actively managed, while QAI is passively managed. Over the past 3 years, FFLS returned 8.99%/yr vs 8.67%/yr for QAI. Their 0.54 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. FFLS charges 1.75%/yr vs 0.79%/yr for QAI.
Performance
FFLS vs. QAI - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, FFLS achieves a -1.36% return, which is significantly lower than QAI's 7.67% return.
FFLS
- 1D
- 2.13%
- 1M
- -1.93%
- 6M
- -2.39%
- YTD
- -1.36%
- 1Y
- -3.56%
- 3Y*
- 8.99%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- 7.66%
QAI
- 1D
- 0.25%
- 1M
- -0.72%
- 6M
- 5.22%
- YTD
- 7.67%
- 1Y
- 12.58%
- 3Y*
- 8.67%
- 5Y*
- 4.39%
- 10Y*
- 3.74%
- ALL TIME*
- 3.49%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $154.37K | $125.96K | $156.23K | |
| $2.04M | $2.05M | $2.17M |
FFLS vs. QAI - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
FFLS Future Fund Long/Short ETF | -1.36% | 7.49% | 17.71% | 0.79% |
QAI NYLI Hedge Multi-Strategy Tracker ETF | 7.67% | 8.29% | 6.67% | 5.55% |
Correlation
The correlation between FFLS and QAI is 0.48, which is low. Their historical price movements had little consistent relationship.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most. | 0.48 |
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history. | 0.55 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 21, 2023 | 0.54 |
The correlation between FFLS and QAI has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.48 to 0.55 - 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. QAI — Risk / Return Rank
FFLS
QAI
FFLS vs. QAI - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Future Fund Long/Short ETF (FFLS) and NYLI Hedge Multi-Strategy Tracker ETF (QAI). 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 | QAI | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -2.27 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -3.12 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 0.94 | 1.35 | -0.41 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.41 | 3.39 | -3.80 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -0.79 | 11.62 | -12.40 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
FFLS vs. QAI - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum FFLS drawdown since its inception was -11.05%, smaller than the maximum QAI drawdown of -14.95%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FFLS and QAI.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| FFLS | QAI | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -11.05% | -14.95% | +3.90% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -11.05% | -3.71% | -7.34% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -11.05% | -7.78% | -3.27% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -14.32% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -14.95% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -6.00% | -1.90% | -4.10% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -3.27% | -2.56% | -0.71% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 5.67% | 1.08% | +4.59% |
Volatility
FFLS vs. QAI - Volatility Comparison
Future Fund Long/Short ETF (FFLS) has a higher volatility of 4.13% compared to NYLI Hedge Multi-Strategy Tracker ETF (QAI) at 1.82%. This indicates that FFLS's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than QAI based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| FFLS | QAI | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 4.13% | 1.82% | +2.31% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 8.76% | 5.78% | +2.98% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 10.38% | 6.85% | +3.53% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 11.47% | 6.71% | +4.76% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 11.47% | 6.24% | +5.23% |
FFLS vs. QAI - Expense Ratio Comparison
FFLS has a 1.75% expense ratio, which is higher than QAI's 0.79% expense ratio.
Dividends
FFLS vs. QAI - Dividend Comparison
FFLS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 6.67%, more than QAI's 1.40% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FFLS Future Fund Long/Short ETF | 6.67% | 6.58% | 3.34% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
QAI NYLI Hedge Multi-Strategy Tracker ETF | 1.40% | 1.50% | 2.22% | 4.08% | 2.00% | 0.28% | 1.98% | 1.91% | 1.90% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.48% |
Frequently Asked Questions
FFLS and QAI have a correlation of 0.48, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
FFLS has higher volatility (4.13%) compared to QAI (1.82%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FFLS dropped -11.05% vs QAI's -14.95%.
On 3-year performance, FFLS leads with 8.99% vs 8.67% for QAI. On fees, QAI is cheaper at 0.79% per year. On volatility, QAI has been the lower-risk option at 1.82%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 3-year period, FFLS has performed better with a 8.99% return vs 8.67%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
QAI is cheaper with a 0.79% expense ratio, compared with 1.75% for FFLS.
FFLS has the higher dividend yield at 6.67%, compared with 1.40% for QAI.
They also come from different issuers: Future Fund and New York Life. Their fees differ too: 1.75% for FFLS and 0.79% for QAI.
QAI currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.84 vs -0.43), 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 QAI
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