FLYD vs. MSFD

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

FLYD (MicroSectors Travel -3X Inverse Leveraged ETNs) and MSFD (Direxion Daily MSFT Bear 1X Shares) are both Inverse Equities funds - FLYD tracks the MerQube MicroSectors U.S. Travel Index while MSFD tracks the Microsoft Corporation (-100%). Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, FLYD returned -55.26%/yr vs -7.16%/yr for MSFD. At a 0.42 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. FLYD charges 0.95%/yr vs 1.06%/yr for MSFD.

Performance

FLYD vs. MSFD - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in MicroSectors Travel -3X Inverse Leveraged ETNs (FLYD) and Direxion Daily MSFT Bear 1X Shares (MSFD). 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 MSFD's 10.43% return.

FLYD

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

MSFD

• 1D: 3.26%
• 1M: -3.86%
• YTD: 10.43%
• 6M: 9.36%
• 1Y: 7.43%
• 3Y*: -7.16%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

FLYD vs. MSFD - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
FLYD MicroSectors Travel -3X Inverse Leveraged ETNs	-11.20%	-60.42%	-54.13%	-75.14%	-1.71%
MSFD Direxion Daily MSFT Bear 1X Shares	10.43%	-13.36%	-7.86%	-35.90%	3.88%

Correlation

The correlation between FLYD and MSFD is 0.27, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.27
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.36
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 8, 2022	0.42

The correlation between FLYD and MSFD shifts across timeframes, from 0.27 (1 year) to 0.42 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

FLYD vs. MSFD — 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

MSFD

MSFD Risk / Return Rank: 13
MSFD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 13
MSFD Sortino Ratio Rank: 14
MSFD Omega Ratio Rank: 14
MSFD Calmar Ratio Rank: 13
MSFD Martin Ratio Rank: 13

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. MSFD - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for MicroSectors Travel -3X Inverse Leveraged ETNs (FLYD) and Direxion Daily MSFT Bear 1X Shares (MSFD). 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	MSFD	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.65	0.29	-0.94
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-0.67	0.63	-1.31
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.92	1.08	-0.16
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.88	0.32	-1.20
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-1.30	0.89	-2.19
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. MSFD - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FLYD Sharpe Ratio is -0.65, which is lower than the MSFD Sharpe Ratio of 0.29. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FLYD and MSFD, 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	MSFD	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.65	0.29	-0.94
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	-0.75	-0.51	-0.23

Drawdowns

FLYD vs. MSFD - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FLYD drawdown since its inception was -98.11%, which is greater than MSFD's maximum drawdown of -59.90%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FLYD and MSFD.

Drawdown Indicators

	FLYD	MSFD	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-98.11%	-59.90%	-38.21%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-54.89%	-23.25%	-31.64%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-93.41%	-40.50%	-52.91%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-97.95%	-50.20%	-47.75%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-83.12%	-41.59%	-41.53%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	37.06%	8.40%	+28.66%

Volatility

FLYD vs. MSFD - Volatility Comparison

MicroSectors Travel -3X Inverse Leveraged ETNs (FLYD) has a higher volatility of 25.85% compared to Direxion Daily MSFT Bear 1X Shares (MSFD) at 10.12%. This indicates that FLYD's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than MSFD based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FLYD	MSFD	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	25.85%	10.12%	+15.73%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	59.48%	22.06%	+37.42%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	74.47%	25.32%	+49.15%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	83.70%	26.15%	+57.55%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	83.70%	26.15%	+57.55%

FLYD vs. MSFD - Expense Ratio Comparison

FLYD has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is lower than MSFD's 1.06% expense ratio.

Dividends

FLYD vs. MSFD - Dividend Comparison

FLYD has not paid dividends to shareholders, while MSFD's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.83%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022
FLYD MicroSectors Travel -3X Inverse Leveraged ETNs	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
MSFD Direxion Daily MSFT Bear 1X Shares	2.83%	3.33%	4.46%	4.43%	0.74%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FLYD and MSFD in my portfolio?

FLYD and MSFD have a correlation of 0.27, 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 MSFD?

FLYD has higher volatility (25.85%) compared to MSFD (10.12%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FLYD dropped -98.11% vs MSFD's -59.90%.

Which ETF is better, FLYD or MSFD?

On 3-year performance, MSFD leads with -7.16% vs -55.26% for FLYD. On fees, FLYD is cheaper at 0.95% per year. On volatility, MSFD has been the lower-risk option at 10.12%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FLYD or MSFD?

Over the 3-year period, MSFD has performed better with a -7.16% return vs -55.26%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FLYD or MSFD?

FLYD is cheaper with a 0.95% expense ratio, compared with 1.06% for MSFD.

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

MSFD has the higher dividend yield at 2.83%, compared with 0.00% for FLYD.

What is the main difference between FLYD and MSFD?

FLYD tracks MerQube MicroSectors U.S. Travel Index, while MSFD tracks Microsoft Corporation (-100%). They also come from different issuers: REX and Direxion. Their fees differ too: 0.95% for FLYD and 1.06% for MSFD.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

MSFD currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.29 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.