MFUT vs. FBDC

Last updated Jul 14, 2026

MFUT (Cambria Chesapeake Pure Trend ETF) and FBDC (FT Confluence BDC & Specialty Finance Income ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - MFUT is a Systematic Trend fund actively managed by Cambria, while FBDC is a Financials Equities fund actively managed by First Trust. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, MFUT returned 26.84% vs -12.75% for FBDC. At a correlation of -0.03, they often move in opposite directions. MFUT charges 1.18%/yr vs 1.35%/yr for FBDC.

Performance

MFUT vs. FBDC - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Cambria Chesapeake Pure Trend ETF (MFUT) and FT Confluence BDC & Specialty Finance Income ETF (FBDC). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, MFUT achieves a 15.99% return, which is significantly higher than FBDC's -7.16% return.

MFUT

• 1D: 0.90%
• 1M: -0.78%
• 6M: 9.64%
• YTD: 15.99%
• 1Y: 26.84%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

FBDC

• 1D: -0.75%
• 1M: 0.63%
• 6M: -7.47%
• YTD: -7.16%
• 1Y: -12.75%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

MFUT vs. FBDC - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
MFUT Cambria Chesapeake Pure Trend ETF	15.99%	12.04%
FBDC FT Confluence BDC & Specialty Finance Income ETF	-7.16%	-2.66%

Correlation

The correlation between MFUT and FBDC is -0.03, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.03
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 30, 2025	-0.03

Return for Risk

MFUT vs. FBDC — Risk / Return Rank

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

MFUT

MFUT Risk / Return Rank: 64
MFUT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 67
MFUT Sortino Ratio Rank: 58
MFUT Omega Ratio Rank: 72
MFUT Calmar Ratio Rank: 69
MFUT Martin Ratio Rank: 56

FBDC

FBDC Risk / Return Rank: 4
FBDC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3
FBDC Sortino Ratio Rank: 4
FBDC Omega Ratio Rank: 4
FBDC Calmar Ratio Rank: 4
FBDC Martin Ratio Rank: 4

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.

MFUT vs. FBDC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Cambria Chesapeake Pure Trend ETF (MFUT) and FT Confluence BDC & Specialty Finance Income ETF (FBDC). 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.

	MFUT	FBDC	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.74	-0.71	+2.45
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.20	-0.93	+3.13
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.34	0.90	+0.44
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.72	-0.62	+3.35
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	7.56	-1.05	+8.61

MFUT vs. FBDC - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MFUT Sharpe Ratio is 1.74, which is higher than the FBDC Sharpe Ratio of -0.71. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MFUT and FBDC, 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

MFUT vs. FBDC - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MFUT drawdown since its inception was -29.28%, which is greater than FBDC's maximum drawdown of -20.60%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MFUT and FBDC.

Drawdown Indicators

	MFUT	FBDC	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-29.28%	-20.60%	-8.68%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-9.89%	-20.60%	+10.71%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-5.75%	-15.10%	+9.35%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-16.07%	-10.71%	-5.36%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.56%	12.14%	-8.58%

Volatility

MFUT vs. FBDC - Volatility Comparison

Cambria Chesapeake Pure Trend ETF (MFUT) has a higher volatility of 5.35% compared to FT Confluence BDC & Specialty Finance Income ETF (FBDC) at 4.14%. This indicates that MFUT's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FBDC based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	MFUT	FBDC	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.35%	4.14%	+1.21%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	13.29%	14.46%	-1.17%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	15.57%	17.98%	-2.41%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	13.66%	17.85%	-4.19%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	13.66%	17.85%	-4.19%

MFUT vs. FBDC - Expense Ratio Comparison

MFUT has a 1.18% expense ratio, which is lower than FBDC's 1.35% expense ratio.

Dividends

MFUT vs. FBDC - Dividend Comparison

MFUT has not paid dividends to shareholders, while FBDC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 12.38%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024
FBDC FT Confluence BDC & Specialty Finance Income ETF	12.38%	5.41%	0.00%
MFUT Cambria Chesapeake Pure Trend ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.33%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both MFUT and FBDC in my portfolio?

MFUT and FBDC have a correlation of -0.03, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, MFUT or FBDC?

MFUT has higher volatility (5.35%) compared to FBDC (4.14%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MFUT dropped -29.28% vs FBDC's -20.60%.

Which ETF is better, MFUT or FBDC?

On 1-year performance, MFUT leads with 26.84% vs -12.75% for FBDC. On fees, MFUT is cheaper at 1.18% per year. On volatility, FBDC has been the lower-risk option at 4.14%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, MFUT or FBDC?

Over the 1-year period, MFUT has performed better with a 26.84% return vs -12.75%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, MFUT or FBDC?

MFUT is cheaper with a 1.18% expense ratio, compared with 1.35% for FBDC.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, MFUT or FBDC?

FBDC has the higher dividend yield at 12.38%, compared with 0.00% for MFUT.

What is the main difference between MFUT and FBDC?

MFUT is categorized as Systematic Trend, while FBDC is Financials Equities. They also come from different issuers: Cambria and First Trust. Their fees differ too: 1.18% for MFUT and 1.35% for FBDC.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

MFUT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.74 vs -0.71), 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.