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 6.42% return, which is significantly higher than FFLS's -2.16% return.


HDG

1D
-0.66%
1M
-0.28%
6M
4.61%
YTD
6.42%
1Y
11.62%
3Y*
7.10%
5Y*
3.33%
10Y*
3.85%

FFLS

1D
-1.45%
1M
0.15%
6M
-4.12%
YTD
-2.16%
1Y
-3.85%
3Y*
7.69%
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
6.42%7.18%5.12%3.06%
FFLS
The Future Fund Long/Short ETF
-2.16%7.49%17.71%0.79%

Correlation

The correlation between HDG and FFLS is 0.43, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


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

0.43

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

0.49

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

0.49

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: 7474
Overall Rank
HDG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7272
Sharpe Ratio Rank
HDG Sortino Ratio Rank: 7474
Sortino Ratio Rank
HDG Omega Ratio Rank: 7575
Omega Ratio Rank
HDG Calmar Ratio Rank: 7373
Calmar Ratio Rank
HDG Martin Ratio Rank: 7878
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: 55
Omega Ratio Rank
FFLS Calmar Ratio Rank: 66
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

+2.23

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+3.15

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.35

0.94

+0.41

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.94

-0.35

+3.29

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

11.54

-0.71

+12.25

HDG vs. FFLS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current HDG Sharpe Ratio is 1.84, which is higher than the FFLS Sharpe Ratio of -0.39. 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

-1.29%

-6.77%

+5.48%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-2.76%

-3.21%

+0.45%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.01%

5.45%

-4.44%

Volatility

HDG vs. FFLS - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for ProShares Hedge Replication (HDG) is 2.10%, while The Future Fund Long/Short ETF (FFLS) has a volatility of 3.75%. 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

2.10%

3.75%

-1.65%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

5.41%

8.24%

-2.83%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

6.34%

9.93%

-3.59%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

7.24%

11.40%

-4.16%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

7.11%

11.40%

-4.29%

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 2.38%, 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
2.38%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 0.43, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

FFLS has higher volatility (3.75%) compared to HDG (2.10%). In terms of maximum drawdown, HDG dropped -15.31% vs FFLS's -11.05%.

On 3-year performance, FFLS leads with 7.69% vs 7.10% for HDG. On fees, HDG is cheaper at 0.95% per year. On volatility, HDG has been the lower-risk option at 2.10%. 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 7.69% return vs 7.10%. 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 2.38% 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 (1.84 vs -0.39), 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