FFTY vs. QFLR

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

FFTY (Innovator IBD 50 ETF) and QFLR (Innovator Nasdaq-100 Managed Floor ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - FFTY is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund tracking the IBD 50 Index, while QFLR is a Nasdaq-100 fund actively managed by Innovator. FFTY is passively managed, while QFLR is actively managed. Over the past year, FFTY returned 38.14% vs 26.98% for QFLR. A 0.68 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. FFTY charges 0.80%/yr vs 0.89%/yr for QFLR.

Performance

FFTY vs. QFLR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Innovator IBD 50 ETF (FFTY) and Innovator Nasdaq-100 Managed Floor ETF (QFLR). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FFTY achieves a 20.11% return, which is significantly higher than QFLR's 6.90% return.

FFTY

• 1D: -0.14%
• 1M: 7.67%
• YTD: 20.11%
• 6M: 21.02%
• 1Y: 38.14%
• 3Y*: 21.57%
• 5Y*: -0.60%
• 10Y*: 7.57%

QFLR

• 1D: 0.01%
• 1M: 3.99%
• YTD: 6.90%
• 6M: 5.88%
• 1Y: 26.98%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

FFTY vs. QFLR - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
FFTY Innovator IBD 50 ETF	20.11%	23.38%	15.38%
QFLR Innovator Nasdaq-100 Managed Floor ETF	6.90%	17.27%	16.64%

Correlation

The correlation between FFTY and QFLR is 0.63, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.63
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 26, 2024	0.68

The correlation between FFTY and QFLR has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.63 to 0.68 - a consistent structural relationship.

FFTY vs. QFLR - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	FFTY	QFLR
Industrials	26.6%	2.8%
Technology	24.8%	50.8%
Basic Materials	21.6%	0.0%
Financial Services	13.1%	0.9%
Healthcare	12.1%	3.2%
Energy	8.0%	1.1%
Consumer Cyclical	4.8%	12.1%
Communication Services	3.7%	18.4%
Utilities	2.1%	1.5%
Consumer Defensive	-	9.2%
Real Estate	-	-

Return for Risk

FFTY vs. QFLR — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

FFTY

FFTY Risk / Return Rank: 30
FFTY Sharpe Ratio Rank: 30
FFTY Sortino Ratio Rank: 28
FFTY Omega Ratio Rank: 30
FFTY Calmar Ratio Rank: 33
FFTY Martin Ratio Rank: 30

QFLR

QFLR Risk / Return Rank: 74
QFLR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 73
QFLR Sortino Ratio Rank: 71
QFLR Omega Ratio Rank: 74
QFLR Calmar Ratio Rank: 71
QFLR Martin Ratio Rank: 78

The rank (0–100) shows how this investment's returns compare to the risk taken. Higher = better. Based on the past 12 months of data, combining Sharpe, Sortino, and other metrics used by quantitative funds and institutional investors.

FFTY vs. QFLR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Innovator IBD 50 ETF (FFTY) and Innovator Nasdaq-100 Managed Floor ETF (QFLR). 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.

	FFTY	QFLR	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	1.12	2.41	-1.28
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	1.55	3.26	-1.71
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.20	1.44	-0.24
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.65	3.56	-1.91
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	4.36	15.19	-10.83
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

FFTY vs. QFLR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FFTY Sharpe Ratio is 1.12, which is lower than the QFLR Sharpe Ratio of 2.41. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FFTY and QFLR, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	FFTY	QFLR	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.12	2.41	-1.28
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	-0.02	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.28	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.20	1.40	-1.20

Drawdowns

FFTY vs. QFLR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FFTY drawdown since its inception was -59.46%, which is greater than QFLR's maximum drawdown of -13.97%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FFTY and QFLR.

Drawdown Indicators

	FFTY	QFLR	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-59.46%	-13.97%	-45.49%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-23.29%	-7.61%	-15.68%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-29.60%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-59.46%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-59.46%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-15.34%	-0.48%	-14.86%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-22.38%	-2.50%	-19.88%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	8.77%	1.78%	+6.99%

Volatility

FFTY vs. QFLR - Volatility Comparison

Innovator IBD 50 ETF (FFTY) has a higher volatility of 9.42% compared to Innovator Nasdaq-100 Managed Floor ETF (QFLR) at 2.53%. This indicates that FFTY's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than QFLR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FFTY	QFLR	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	9.42%	2.53%	+6.89%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	26.18%	8.05%	+18.13%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	34.09%	11.28%	+22.81%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	29.14%	12.62%	+16.52%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	27.41%	12.62%	+14.79%

FFTY vs. QFLR - Expense Ratio Comparison

FFTY has a 0.80% expense ratio, which is lower than QFLR's 0.89% expense ratio.

Dividends

FFTY vs. QFLR - Dividend Comparison

FFTY's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.12%, while QFLR has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
FFTY Innovator IBD 50 ETF	1.12%	1.35%	0.91%	0.65%	2.75%	0.22%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.17%
QFLR Innovator Nasdaq-100 Managed Floor ETF	0.00%	0.02%	0.03%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FFTY and QFLR in my portfolio?

FFTY and QFLR have a correlation of 0.63, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, FFTY or QFLR?

FFTY has higher volatility (9.42%) compared to QFLR (2.53%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FFTY dropped -59.46% vs QFLR's -13.97%.

Which ETF is better, FFTY or QFLR?

On 1-year performance, FFTY leads with 38.14% vs 26.98% for QFLR. On fees, FFTY is cheaper at 0.80% per year. On volatility, QFLR has been the lower-risk option at 2.53%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FFTY or QFLR?

Over the 1-year period, FFTY has performed better with a 38.14% return vs 26.98%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FFTY or QFLR?

FFTY is cheaper with a 0.80% expense ratio, compared with 0.89% for QFLR.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, FFTY or QFLR?

FFTY has the higher dividend yield at 1.12%, compared with 0.00% for QFLR.

What is the main difference between FFTY and QFLR?

FFTY is categorized as Large Cap Growth Equities, while QFLR is Nasdaq-100. Their fees differ too: 0.80% for FFTY and 0.89% for QFLR.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

QFLR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.41 vs 1.12), 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.