PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
HDG vs. FFLS
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

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.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, HDG achieves a 6.05% return, which is significantly higher than FFLS's -2.07% return.


HDG

1D
-0.51%
1M
0.60%
YTD
6.05%
6M
5.81%
1Y
12.20%
3Y*
7.49%
5Y*
2.84%
10Y*
4.06%

FFLS

1D
0.33%
1M
-0.31%
YTD
-2.07%
6M
-1.85%
1Y
-3.14%
3Y*
8.35%
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

HDG vs. FFLS - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023
HDG
ProShares Hedge Replication
6.05%7.18%5.12%3.06%
FFLS
The Future Fund Long/Short ETF
-2.07%7.49%17.71%0.79%

Correlation

The correlation between HDG and FFLS is 0.41, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.41

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.48

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 21, 2023

0.48

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.


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: 7171
Overall Rank
HDG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6969
Sharpe Ratio Rank
HDG Sortino Ratio Rank: 7171
Sortino Ratio Rank
HDG Omega Ratio Rank: 7373
Omega Ratio Rank
HDG Calmar Ratio Rank: 6969
Calmar Ratio Rank
HDG Martin Ratio Rank: 7474
Martin Ratio Rank

FFLS
FFLS Risk / Return Rank: 66
Overall Rank
FFLS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 66
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FFLS Sortino Ratio Rank: 66
Sortino Ratio Rank
FFLS Omega Ratio Rank: 66
Omega Ratio Rank
FFLS Calmar Ratio Rank: 77
Calmar Ratio Rank
FFLS Martin Ratio Rank: 66
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

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.


HDGFFLSDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+2.29

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+3.23

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.38

0.95

+0.43

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.09

-0.29

+3.37

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

12.41

-0.59

+13.00

HDG vs. FFLS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current HDG Sharpe Ratio is 1.96, which is higher than the FFLS Sharpe Ratio of -0.33. 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.


Loading charts...

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.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


HDGFFLSDifference

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%

-11.05%

+3.85%

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

-1.63%

-6.68%

+5.05%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-2.76%

-3.17%

+0.41%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

0.99%

5.31%

-4.32%

Volatility

HDG vs. FFLS - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for ProShares Hedge Replication (HDG) is 3.06%, while The Future Fund Long/Short ETF (FFLS) has a volatility of 4.43%. 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.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


HDGFFLSDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.06%

4.43%

-1.37%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

5.34%

7.92%

-2.58%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

6.26%

9.69%

-3.43%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

7.24%

11.39%

-4.15%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

7.12%

11.39%

-4.27%

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 2.36%, less than FFLS's 6.72% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
FFLS
The Future Fund Long/Short ETF
6.72%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
2.36%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


HDG and FFLS 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.

FFLS has higher volatility (4.43%) compared to HDG (3.06%). In terms of maximum drawdown, HDG dropped -15.31% vs FFLS's -11.05%.

On 3-year performance, FFLS leads with 8.35% vs 7.49% for HDG. On fees, HDG is cheaper at 0.95% per year. On volatility, HDG has been the lower-risk option at 3.06%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 3-year period, FFLS has performed better with a 8.35% return vs 7.49%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

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

FFLS has the higher dividend yield at 6.72%, compared with 2.36% for HDG.

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

HDG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.96 vs -0.33), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for HDG and FFLS

Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.

Open Portfolio Optimizer