HDG vs. FFLS

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

HDG (ProShares Hedge Replication) and FFLS (The Future Fund Long/Short ETF) are both Long-Short funds. HDG is passively managed, while FFLS is actively managed. Over the past year, HDG returned 13.32% vs -0.45% for FFLS. At a 0.48 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. HDG charges 0.95%/yr vs 1.75%/yr for FFLS.

Performance

HDG vs. FFLS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in ProShares Hedge Replication (HDG) and The Future Fund Long/Short ETF (FFLS). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, HDG achieves a 6.62% return, which is significantly higher than FFLS's -0.26% return.

HDG

• 1D: 0.21%
• 1M: 1.08%
• YTD: 6.62%
• 6M: 7.09%
• 1Y: 13.32%
• 3Y*: 7.63%
• 5Y*: 3.06%
• 10Y*: 3.89%

FFLS

• 1D: -0.63%
• 1M: 2.89%
• YTD: -0.26%
• 6M: -0.66%
• 1Y: -0.45%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

HDG vs. FFLS - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
HDG ProShares Hedge Replication	6.62%	7.18%	5.12%	3.09%
FFLS The Future Fund Long/Short ETF	-0.26%	7.49%	17.71%	2.03%

Correlation

The correlation between HDG and FFLS is 0.40, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.40
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 22, 2023	0.48

HDG vs. FFLS - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	HDG	FFLS
Industrials	17.7%	8.4%
Technology	17.0%	14.4%
Healthcare	16.5%	10.1%
Financial Services	15.8%	-4.2%
Consumer Cyclical	8.4%	6.9%
Real Estate	6.1%	2.6%
Energy	6.1%	4.8%
Basic Materials	4.8%	-
Utilities	2.9%	-
Communication Services	2.4%	7.2%
Consumer Defensive	2.4%	1.6%

Return for Risk

HDG vs. FFLS — Risk / Return Rank

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

HDG

HDG Risk / Return Rank: 75
HDG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 74
HDG Sortino Ratio Rank: 80
HDG Omega Ratio Rank: 79
HDG Calmar Ratio Rank: 68
HDG Martin Ratio Rank: 75

FFLS

FFLS Risk / Return Rank: 8
FFLS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8
FFLS Sortino Ratio Rank: 8
FFLS Omega Ratio Rank: 7
FFLS Calmar Ratio Rank: 8
FFLS Martin Ratio Rank: 8

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.

HDG vs. FFLS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ProShares Hedge Replication (HDG) and The Future Fund Long/Short ETF (FFLS). 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.

	HDG	FFLS	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.37	-0.05	+2.42
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.52	-0.01	+3.53
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.46	1.00	+0.46
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.37	-0.04	+3.41
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	13.91	-0.09	+14.00
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

HDG vs. FFLS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current HDG Sharpe Ratio is 2.37, which is higher than the FFLS Sharpe Ratio of -0.05. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of HDG and FFLS, 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

	HDG	FFLS	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.37	-0.05	+2.42
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.43	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.55	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.43	0.80	-0.37

Drawdowns

HDG vs. FFLS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum HDG drawdown since its inception was -15.31%, which is greater than FFLS's maximum drawdown of -11.05%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for HDG and FFLS.

Drawdown Indicators

	HDG	FFLS	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-15.31%	-11.05%	-4.26%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-3.97%	-11.05%	+7.08%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-7.20%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-15.31%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-15.31%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.15%	-4.96%	+4.81%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.77%	-3.09%	+0.32%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.96%	5.07%	-4.11%

Volatility

HDG vs. FFLS - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for ProShares Hedge Replication (HDG) is 1.72%, while The Future Fund Long/Short ETF (FFLS) has a volatility of 3.54%. This indicates that HDG experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FFLS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	HDG	FFLS	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.72%	3.54%	-1.82%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	4.58%	6.92%	-2.34%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	5.63%	8.94%	-3.31%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	7.15%	11.23%	-4.08%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	7.11%	11.23%	-4.12%

HDG vs. FFLS - Expense Ratio Comparison

HDG has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is lower than FFLS's 1.75% expense ratio.

Dividends

HDG vs. FFLS - Dividend Comparison

HDG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.35%, less than FFLS's 6.59% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
FFLS The Future Fund Long/Short ETF	6.59%	6.58%	3.34%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
HDG ProShares Hedge Replication	2.35%	2.55%	3.50%	3.48%	0.39%	0.00%	0.08%	1.09%	0.51%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both HDG and FFLS in my portfolio?

HDG and FFLS have a correlation of 0.40, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, HDG or FFLS?

FFLS has higher volatility (3.54%) compared to HDG (1.72%). In terms of maximum drawdown, HDG dropped -15.31% vs FFLS's -11.05%.

Which ETF is better, HDG or FFLS?

On 1-year performance, HDG leads with 13.32% vs -0.45% for FFLS. On fees, HDG is cheaper at 0.95% per year. On volatility, HDG has been the lower-risk option at 1.72%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, HDG or FFLS?

Over the 1-year period, HDG has performed better with a 13.32% return vs -0.45%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, HDG or FFLS?

HDG is cheaper with a 0.95% expense ratio, compared with 1.75% for FFLS.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, HDG or FFLS?

FFLS has the higher dividend yield at 6.59%, compared with 2.35% for HDG.

What is the main difference between HDG and FFLS?

They also come from different issuers: ProShares and The Future Fund. Their fees differ too: 0.95% for HDG and 1.75% for FFLS.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

HDG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.37 vs -0.05), 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.