FLYD vs. WTIU

Last updated Jun 26, 2026

FLYD (MicroSectors Travel -3X Inverse Leveraged ETNs) and WTIU (MicroSectors Energy 3X Leveraged ETN) are both exchange-traded funds - FLYD is a Inverse Equities fund tracking the MerQube MicroSectors U.S. Travel Index, while WTIU is a Leveraged Equities fund tracking the Solactive MicroSectors Energy Index - Benchmark TR Gross (--300%). Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, FLYD returned -56.28%/yr vs -1.81%/yr for WTIU. At a correlation of -0.13, they often move in opposite directions. Both charge a 0.95% expense ratio.

Performance

FLYD vs. WTIU - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in MicroSectors Travel -3X Inverse Leveraged ETNs (FLYD) and MicroSectors Energy 3X Leveraged ETN (WTIU). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FLYD achieves a -30.35% return, which is significantly lower than WTIU's 43.70% return.

FLYD

• 1D: 3.79%
• 1M: -24.33%
• YTD: -30.35%
• 6M: -26.65%
• 1Y: -55.29%
• 3Y*: -56.28%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

WTIU

• 1D: 2.10%
• 1M: -18.32%
• YTD: 43.70%
• 6M: 46.65%
• 1Y: 45.61%
• 3Y*: -1.81%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

FLYD vs. WTIU - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
FLYD MicroSectors Travel -3X Inverse Leveraged ETNs	-30.35%	-60.42%	-54.13%	-42.44%
WTIU MicroSectors Energy 3X Leveraged ETN	43.70%	-17.13%	-29.63%	-28.45%

Correlation

The correlation between FLYD and WTIU is 0.18, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.18
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	-0.08
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 15, 2023	-0.13

The correlation between FLYD and WTIU shifts across timeframes, from -0.13 (all time) to 0.18 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

FLYD vs. WTIU - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	FLYD	WTIU
Consumer Cyclical	51.1%	-
Industrials	27.8%	-
Technology	13.2%	-
Communication Services	7.8%	-
Real Estate	0.1%	-
Basic Materials	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Energy	-	100.0%
Financial Services	-	-
Healthcare	-	-
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

FLYD vs. WTIU — Risk / Return Rank

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

FLYD

FLYD Risk / Return Rank: 2
FLYD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4
FLYD Sortino Ratio Rank: 4
FLYD Omega Ratio Rank: 4
FLYD Calmar Ratio Rank: 0
FLYD Martin Ratio Rank: 0

WTIU

WTIU Risk / Return Rank: 22
WTIU Sharpe Ratio Rank: 20
WTIU Sortino Ratio Rank: 24
WTIU Omega Ratio Rank: 23
WTIU Calmar Ratio Rank: 22
WTIU Martin Ratio Rank: 22

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. WTIU - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for MicroSectors Travel -3X Inverse Leveraged ETNs (FLYD) and MicroSectors Energy 3X Leveraged ETN (WTIU). 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.

	FLYD	WTIU	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.73	0.67	-1.40
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-0.90	1.25	-2.15
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.90	1.15	-0.26
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-1.01	0.97	-1.98
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-2.07	2.51	-4.58

FLYD vs. WTIU - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FLYD Sharpe Ratio is -0.73, which is lower than the WTIU Sharpe Ratio of 0.67. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FLYD and WTIU, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

FLYD vs. WTIU - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FLYD drawdown since its inception was -98.45%, which is greater than WTIU's maximum drawdown of -75.73%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FLYD and WTIU.

Drawdown Indicators

	FLYD	WTIU	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-98.45%	-75.73%	-22.72%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-55.15%	-47.07%	-8.08%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-94.61%	-75.73%	-18.88%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-98.39%	-49.06%	-49.33%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-83.26%	-39.21%	-44.05%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	30.03%	18.25%	+11.78%

Volatility

FLYD vs. WTIU - Volatility Comparison

MicroSectors Travel -3X Inverse Leveraged ETNs (FLYD) has a higher volatility of 26.01% compared to MicroSectors Energy 3X Leveraged ETN (WTIU) at 22.57%. This indicates that FLYD's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than WTIU based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FLYD	WTIU	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	26.01%	22.57%	+3.44%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	62.95%	56.28%	+6.67%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	75.71%	68.30%	+7.41%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	83.83%	70.77%	+13.06%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	83.83%	70.77%	+13.06%

FLYD vs. WTIU - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both FLYD and WTIU have an expense ratio of 0.95%.

Dividends

FLYD vs. WTIU - Dividend Comparison

Neither FLYD nor WTIU has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FLYD and WTIU in my portfolio?

FLYD and WTIU have a correlation of 0.18, 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 WTIU?

FLYD has higher volatility (26.01%) compared to WTIU (22.57%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FLYD dropped -98.45% vs WTIU's -75.73%.

Which ETF is better, FLYD or WTIU?

On 3-year performance, WTIU leads with -1.81% vs -56.28% for FLYD. Both ETFs have the same 0.95% expense ratio. On volatility, WTIU has been the lower-risk option at 22.57%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FLYD or WTIU?

Over the 3-year period, WTIU has performed better with a -1.81% return vs -56.28%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FLYD or WTIU?

FLYD and WTIU have the same expense ratio: 0.95% per year.

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

FLYD and WTIU have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

What is the main difference between FLYD and WTIU?

FLYD is categorized as Inverse Equities, while WTIU is Leveraged Equities. FLYD tracks MerQube MicroSectors U.S. Travel Index, while WTIU tracks Solactive MicroSectors Energy Index - Benchmark TR Gross (--300%).

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

WTIU currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.67 vs -0.73), 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.