FQAL vs. WNTR

Last updated Jun 25, 2026

FQAL (Fidelity Quality Factor ETF) and WNTR (YieldMax Short MSTR Option Income Strategy ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - FQAL is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund tracking the Fidelity U.S. Quality Factor Index, while WNTR is a Derivative Income fund actively managed by YieldMax. FQAL is passively managed, while WNTR is actively managed. Over the past year, FQAL returned 17.84% vs 97.02% for WNTR. At a correlation of -0.44, they often move in opposite directions. FQAL charges 0.29%/yr vs 1.01%/yr for WNTR.

Performance

FQAL vs. WNTR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Fidelity Quality Factor ETF (FQAL) and YieldMax Short MSTR Option Income Strategy ETF (WNTR). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FQAL achieves a 6.12% return, which is significantly lower than WNTR's 10.46% return.

FQAL

• 1D: 0.06%
• 1M: -0.93%
• YTD: 6.12%
• 6M: 4.60%
• 1Y: 17.84%
• 3Y*: 18.87%
• 5Y*: 11.61%
• 10Y*: —

WNTR

• 1D: 6.01%
• 1M: 37.47%
• YTD: 10.46%
• 6M: 14.06%
• 1Y: 97.02%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

FQAL vs. WNTR - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
FQAL Fidelity Quality Factor ETF	6.12%	17.26%
WNTR YieldMax Short MSTR Option Income Strategy ETF	10.46%	52.78%

Correlation

The correlation between FQAL and WNTR is -0.41, 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	-0.41
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 27, 2025	-0.44

Return for Risk

FQAL vs. WNTR — Risk / Return Rank

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

FQAL

FQAL Risk / Return Rank: 51
FQAL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 50
FQAL Sortino Ratio Rank: 50
FQAL Omega Ratio Rank: 49
FQAL Calmar Ratio Rank: 47
FQAL Martin Ratio Rank: 59

WNTR

WNTR Risk / Return Rank: 51
WNTR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 63
WNTR Sortino Ratio Rank: 49
WNTR Omega Ratio Rank: 52
WNTR Calmar Ratio Rank: 51
WNTR Martin Ratio Rank: 40

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.

FQAL vs. WNTR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Fidelity Quality Factor ETF (FQAL) and YieldMax Short MSTR Option Income Strategy ETF (WNTR). 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.

	FQAL	WNTR	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.56	1.85	-0.28
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.23	2.20	+0.03
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.28	1.30	-0.01
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.13	2.29	-0.16
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	9.48	5.85	+3.63

FQAL vs. WNTR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FQAL Sharpe Ratio is 1.56, which is comparable to the WNTR Sharpe Ratio of 1.85. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FQAL and WNTR, 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

FQAL vs. WNTR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FQAL drawdown since its inception was -33.71%, smaller than the maximum WNTR drawdown of -42.65%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FQAL and WNTR.

Drawdown Indicators

	FQAL	WNTR	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-33.71%	-42.65%	+8.94%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-8.43%	-42.65%	+34.22%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-16.87%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-25.50%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.13%	-9.88%	+7.75%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-4.57%	-20.93%	+16.36%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.89%	16.70%	-14.81%

Volatility

FQAL vs. WNTR - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Fidelity Quality Factor ETF (FQAL) is 3.72%, while YieldMax Short MSTR Option Income Strategy ETF (WNTR) has a volatility of 17.54%. This indicates that FQAL experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than WNTR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FQAL	WNTR	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.72%	17.54%	-13.82%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	9.03%	45.99%	-36.96%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	11.50%	52.83%	-41.33%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	16.23%	53.10%	-36.87%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	17.56%	53.10%	-35.54%

FQAL vs. WNTR - Expense Ratio Comparison

FQAL has a 0.29% expense ratio, which is lower than WNTR's 1.01% expense ratio.

Dividends

FQAL vs. WNTR - Dividend Comparison

FQAL's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.19%, less than WNTR's 96.66% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016
FQAL Fidelity Quality Factor ETF	1.19%	1.12%	1.20%	1.35%	1.52%	1.17%	1.46%	1.55%	1.73%	1.53%	0.43%
WNTR YieldMax Short MSTR Option Income Strategy ETF	96.66%	58.56%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FQAL and WNTR in my portfolio?

FQAL and WNTR have a correlation of -0.41, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, FQAL or WNTR?

WNTR has higher volatility (17.54%) compared to FQAL (3.72%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FQAL dropped -33.71% vs WNTR's -42.65%.

Which ETF is better, FQAL or WNTR?

On 1-year performance, WNTR leads with 97.02% vs 17.84% for FQAL. On fees, FQAL is cheaper at 0.29% per year. On volatility, FQAL has been the lower-risk option at 3.72%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FQAL or WNTR?

Over the 1-year period, WNTR has performed better with a 97.02% return vs 17.84%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FQAL or WNTR?

FQAL is cheaper with a 0.29% expense ratio, compared with 1.01% for WNTR.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, FQAL or WNTR?

WNTR has the higher dividend yield at 96.66%, compared with 1.19% for FQAL.

What is the main difference between FQAL and WNTR?

FQAL is categorized as Large Cap Growth Equities, while WNTR is Derivative Income. They also come from different issuers: Fidelity and YieldMax. Their fees differ too: 0.29% for FQAL and 1.01% for WNTR.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

WNTR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.85 vs 1.56), 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.