FLYD vs. FEPI

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

FLYD (MicroSectors Travel -3X Inverse Leveraged ETNs) and FEPI (REX FANG & Innovation Equity Premium Income ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - FLYD is a Inverse Equities fund tracking the MerQube MicroSectors U.S. Travel Index, while FEPI is a Technology Equities fund actively managed by REX. FLYD is passively managed, while FEPI is actively managed. Over the past year, FLYD returned -48.13% vs 33.15% for FEPI. At a correlation of -0.56, they often move in opposite directions. FLYD charges 0.95%/yr vs 0.65%/yr for FEPI.

Performance

FLYD vs. FEPI - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in MicroSectors Travel -3X Inverse Leveraged ETNs (FLYD) and REX FANG & Innovation Equity Premium Income ETF (FEPI). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FLYD achieves a -11.20% return, which is significantly lower than FEPI's 10.42% return.

FLYD

• 1D: 3.25%
• 1M: -18.38%
• YTD: -11.20%
• 6M: -19.27%
• 1Y: -48.13%
• 3Y*: -55.26%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

FEPI

• 1D: -0.75%
• 1M: 5.91%
• YTD: 10.42%
• 6M: 11.37%
• 1Y: 33.15%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

FLYD vs. FEPI - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
FLYD MicroSectors Travel -3X Inverse Leveraged ETNs	-11.20%	-60.42%	-54.13%	-39.86%
FEPI REX FANG & Innovation Equity Premium Income ETF	10.42%	18.33%	15.69%	11.70%

Correlation

The correlation between FLYD and FEPI is -0.49, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.49
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 12, 2023	-0.56

The correlation between FLYD and FEPI has been stable across timeframes, ranging from -0.56 to -0.49 - a consistent structural relationship.

FLYD vs. FEPI - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	FLYD	FEPI
Consumer Cyclical	51.9%	13.0%
Industrials	22.8%	-
Technology	16.1%	62.1%
Communication Services	9.0%	24.9%
Real Estate	0.1%	-
Basic Materials	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Energy	-	-
Financial Services	-	-
Healthcare	-	-
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

FLYD vs. FEPI — Risk / Return Rank

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

FLYD

FLYD Risk / Return Rank: 3
FLYD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4
FLYD Sortino Ratio Rank: 4
FLYD Omega Ratio Rank: 4
FLYD Calmar Ratio Rank: 1
FLYD Martin Ratio Rank: 3

FEPI

FEPI Risk / Return Rank: 54
FEPI Sharpe Ratio Rank: 58
FEPI Sortino Ratio Rank: 54
FEPI Omega Ratio Rank: 58
FEPI Calmar Ratio Rank: 51
FEPI Martin Ratio Rank: 51

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.

FLYD vs. FEPI - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for MicroSectors Travel -3X Inverse Leveraged ETNs (FLYD) and REX FANG & Innovation Equity Premium Income ETF (FEPI). 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.

	FLYD	FEPI	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	-0.65	2.02	-2.66
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	-0.67	2.67	-3.34
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.92	1.36	-0.44
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.88	2.58	-3.46
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	-1.30	8.66	-9.96
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

FLYD vs. FEPI - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FLYD Sharpe Ratio is -0.65, which is lower than the FEPI Sharpe Ratio of 2.02. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FLYD and FEPI, 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

	FLYD	FEPI	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.65	2.02	-2.66
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	-0.75	1.16	-1.91

Drawdowns

FLYD vs. FEPI - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FLYD drawdown since its inception was -98.11%, which is greater than FEPI's maximum drawdown of -23.56%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FLYD and FEPI.

Drawdown Indicators

	FLYD	FEPI	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-98.11%	-23.56%	-74.55%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-54.89%	-12.91%	-41.98%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-93.41%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-97.95%	-1.45%	-96.50%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-83.12%	-3.51%	-79.61%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	37.06%	3.84%	+33.22%

Volatility

FLYD vs. FEPI - Volatility Comparison

MicroSectors Travel -3X Inverse Leveraged ETNs (FLYD) has a higher volatility of 25.85% compared to REX FANG & Innovation Equity Premium Income ETF (FEPI) at 3.31%. This indicates that FLYD's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FEPI based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FLYD	FEPI	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	25.85%	3.31%	+22.54%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	59.48%	12.58%	+46.90%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	74.47%	16.54%	+57.93%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	83.70%	19.02%	+64.68%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	83.70%	19.02%	+64.68%

FLYD vs. FEPI - Expense Ratio Comparison

FLYD has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is higher than FEPI's 0.65% expense ratio.

Dividends

FLYD vs. FEPI - Dividend Comparison

FLYD has not paid dividends to shareholders, while FEPI's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 23.92%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023
FEPI REX FANG & Innovation Equity Premium Income ETF	23.92%	25.48%	27.18%	4.21%
FLYD MicroSectors Travel -3X Inverse Leveraged ETNs	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FLYD and FEPI in my portfolio?

FLYD and FEPI have a correlation of -0.49, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, FLYD or FEPI?

FLYD has higher volatility (25.85%) compared to FEPI (3.31%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FLYD dropped -98.11% vs FEPI's -23.56%.

Which ETF is better, FLYD or FEPI?

On 1-year performance, FEPI leads with 33.15% vs -48.13% for FLYD. On fees, FEPI is cheaper at 0.65% per year. On volatility, FEPI has been the lower-risk option at 3.31%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FLYD or FEPI?

Over the 1-year period, FEPI has performed better with a 33.15% return vs -48.13%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FLYD or FEPI?

FEPI is cheaper with a 0.65% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for FLYD.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, FLYD or FEPI?

FEPI has the higher dividend yield at 23.92%, compared with 0.00% for FLYD.

What is the main difference between FLYD and FEPI?

FLYD is categorized as Inverse Equities, while FEPI is Technology Equities. Their fees differ too: 0.95% for FLYD and 0.65% for FEPI.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FEPI currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.02 vs -0.65), 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.