HBTA vs. LQTI

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

HBTA (Horizon Expedition Plus ETF) and LQTI (FT Vest Investment Grade & Target Income ETF) are both Derivative Income funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, HBTA returned 38.33% vs 5.69% for LQTI. At a 0.27 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. HBTA charges 0.85%/yr vs 0.65%/yr for LQTI.

Performance

HBTA vs. LQTI - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Horizon Expedition Plus ETF (HBTA) and FT Vest Investment Grade & Target Income ETF (LQTI). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, HBTA achieves a 14.07% return, which is significantly higher than LQTI's 0.16% return.

HBTA

• 1D: -0.68%
• 1M: 7.20%
• YTD: 14.07%
• 6M: 14.43%
• 1Y: 38.33%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

LQTI

• 1D: -0.26%
• 1M: 0.41%
• YTD: 0.16%
• 6M: -0.04%
• 1Y: 5.69%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

HBTA vs. LQTI - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
HBTA Horizon Expedition Plus ETF	14.07%	14.81%
LQTI FT Vest Investment Grade & Target Income ETF	0.16%	6.69%

Correlation

The correlation between HBTA and LQTI is 0.31, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.31
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 14, 2025	0.27

Return for Risk

HBTA vs. LQTI — Risk / Return Rank

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

HBTA

HBTA Risk / Return Rank: 67
HBTA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 70
HBTA Sortino Ratio Rank: 65
HBTA Omega Ratio Rank: 66
HBTA Calmar Ratio Rank: 60
HBTA Martin Ratio Rank: 74

LQTI

LQTI Risk / Return Rank: 32
LQTI Sharpe Ratio Rank: 31
LQTI Sortino Ratio Rank: 30
LQTI Omega Ratio Rank: 29
LQTI Calmar Ratio Rank: 34
LQTI Martin Ratio Rank: 34

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.

HBTA vs. LQTI - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Horizon Expedition Plus ETF (HBTA) and FT Vest Investment Grade & Target Income ETF (LQTI). 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.

	HBTA	LQTI	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.24	1.12	+1.12
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.96	1.64	+1.32
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.39	1.19	+0.20
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.92	1.68	+1.24
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	13.75	5.15	+8.60
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

HBTA vs. LQTI - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current HBTA Sharpe Ratio is 2.24, which is higher than the LQTI Sharpe Ratio of 1.12. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of HBTA and LQTI, 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

	HBTA	LQTI	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.24	1.12	+1.12
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.91	0.88	+0.03

Drawdowns

HBTA vs. LQTI - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum HBTA drawdown since its inception was -26.73%, which is greater than LQTI's maximum drawdown of -3.41%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for HBTA and LQTI.

Drawdown Indicators

	HBTA	LQTI	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-26.73%	-3.41%	-23.32%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-13.18%	-3.41%	-9.77%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.68%	-1.44%	+0.76%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-4.22%	-0.88%	-3.34%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.80%	1.11%	+1.69%

Volatility

HBTA vs. LQTI - Volatility Comparison

Horizon Expedition Plus ETF (HBTA) has a higher volatility of 4.46% compared to FT Vest Investment Grade & Target Income ETF (LQTI) at 1.65%. This indicates that HBTA's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than LQTI based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	HBTA	LQTI	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.46%	1.65%	+2.81%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	13.24%	4.02%	+9.22%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	17.18%	5.10%	+12.08%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	24.85%	5.97%	+18.88%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	24.85%	5.97%	+18.88%

HBTA vs. LQTI - Expense Ratio Comparison

HBTA has a 0.85% expense ratio, which is higher than LQTI's 0.65% expense ratio.

Dividends

HBTA vs. LQTI - Dividend Comparison

HBTA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.56%, less than LQTI's 9.11% yield.

Position	TTM	2025
HBTA Horizon Expedition Plus ETF	0.56%	0.64%
LQTI FT Vest Investment Grade & Target Income ETF	9.11%	7.01%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both HBTA and LQTI in my portfolio?

HBTA and LQTI have a correlation of 0.31, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, HBTA or LQTI?

HBTA has higher volatility (4.46%) compared to LQTI (1.65%). In terms of maximum drawdown, HBTA dropped -26.73% vs LQTI's -3.41%.

Which ETF is better, HBTA or LQTI?

On 1-year performance, HBTA leads with 38.33% vs 5.69% for LQTI. On fees, LQTI is cheaper at 0.65% per year. On volatility, LQTI has been the lower-risk option at 1.65%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, HBTA or LQTI?

Over the 1-year period, HBTA has performed better with a 38.33% return vs 5.69%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, HBTA or LQTI?

LQTI is cheaper with a 0.65% expense ratio, compared with 0.85% for HBTA.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, HBTA or LQTI?

LQTI has the higher dividend yield at 9.11%, compared with 0.56% for HBTA.

What is the main difference between HBTA and LQTI?

They also come from different issuers: Horizon and FT Vest. Their fees differ too: 0.85% for HBTA and 0.65% for LQTI.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

HBTA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.24 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.