MNA vs. FLOT
MNA (IQ Merger Arbitrage ETF) and FLOT (iShares Floating Rate Bond ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - MNA is a Hedge Fund fund tracking the IQ Merger Arbitrage Index, while FLOT is a Ultrashort Bond fund tracking the Bloomberg US Floating Rate Note < 5 Years Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, MNA returned 2.74%/yr vs 3.03%/yr for FLOT. At a 0.06 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. MNA charges 0.77%/yr vs 0.15%/yr for FLOT.
Performance
MNA vs. FLOT - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
The year-to-date returns for both investments are quite close, with MNA having a 1.79% return and FLOT slightly higher at 1.87%. Over the past 10 years, MNA has underperformed FLOT with an annualized return of 2.74%, while FLOT has yielded a comparatively higher 3.03% annualized return.
MNA
- 1D
- -0.08%
- 1M
- -0.14%
- YTD
- 1.79%
- 6M
- 1.97%
- 1Y
- 4.47%
- 3Y*
- 5.95%
- 5Y*
- 1.83%
- 10Y*
- 2.74%
FLOT
- 1D
- 0.00%
- 1M
- 0.41%
- YTD
- 1.87%
- 6M
- 2.15%
- 1Y
- 4.85%
- 3Y*
- 5.60%
- 5Y*
- 4.20%
- 10Y*
- 3.03%
MNA vs. FLOT - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
MNA IQ Merger Arbitrage ETF | 1.79% | 8.59% | 4.93% | 0.18% | -1.61% | -3.24% | 2.72% | 4.70% | 2.13% | 5.97% |
FLOT iShares Floating Rate Bond ETF | 1.87% | 4.91% | 6.53% | 6.43% | 1.28% | 0.45% | 0.87% | 3.97% | 1.48% | 1.65% |
Correlation
The correlation between MNA and FLOT is 0.24, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.24 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.15 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.18 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.11 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 20, 2011 | 0.06 |
The correlation between MNA and FLOT shifts across timeframes, from 0.06 (all time) to 0.24 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
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
MNA vs. FLOT — Risk / Return Rank
MNA
FLOT
MNA vs. FLOT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for IQ Merger Arbitrage ETF (MNA) and iShares Floating Rate Bond ETF (FLOT). 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.
| MNA | FLOT | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -5.59 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -10.38 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.17 | 3.22 | -2.05 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.22 | 11.27 | -8.06 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 7.99 | 104.83 | -96.83 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| MNA | FLOT | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.95 | 6.54 | -5.59 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.37 | 2.38 | -2.01 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.42 | 0.73 | -0.31 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.36 | 0.66 | -0.30 |
Drawdowns
MNA vs. FLOT - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum MNA drawdown since its inception was -16.68%, which is greater than FLOT's maximum drawdown of -13.54%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MNA and FLOT.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| MNA | FLOT | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -16.68% | -13.54% | -3.14% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -1.40% | -0.43% | -0.97% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -3.01% | -1.57% | -1.44% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -10.45% | -2.36% | -8.09% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -16.68% | -13.54% | -3.14% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.55% | -0.02% | -0.53% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -2.83% | -0.21% | -2.62% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 0.56% | 0.05% | +0.51% |
Volatility
MNA vs. FLOT - Volatility Comparison
IQ Merger Arbitrage ETF (MNA) has a higher volatility of 1.66% compared to iShares Floating Rate Bond ETF (FLOT) at 0.20%. This indicates that MNA's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FLOT based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| MNA | FLOT | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 1.66% | 0.20% | +1.46% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 3.59% | 0.62% | +2.97% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 4.75% | 0.75% | +4.00% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 4.98% | 1.77% | +3.21% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 6.55% | 4.15% | +2.40% |
MNA vs. FLOT - Expense Ratio Comparison
MNA has a 0.77% expense ratio, which is higher than FLOT's 0.15% expense ratio.
Dividends
MNA vs. FLOT - Dividend Comparison
MNA has not paid dividends to shareholders, while FLOT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.54%.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FLOT iShares Floating Rate Bond ETF | 4.54% | 4.84% | 5.82% | 5.66% | 2.06% | 0.43% | 1.25% | 2.78% | 2.41% | 1.46% | 0.97% | 0.53% |
MNA IQ Merger Arbitrage ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 1.20% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 2.30% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.21% | 0.87% |
Frequently Asked Questions
MNA and FLOT have a correlation of 0.24, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
MNA has higher volatility (1.66%) compared to FLOT (0.20%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MNA dropped -16.68% vs FLOT's -13.54%.
On 10-year performance, FLOT leads with 3.03% vs 2.74% for MNA. On fees, FLOT is cheaper at 0.15% per year. On volatility, FLOT has been the lower-risk option at 0.20%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 10-year period, FLOT has performed better with a 3.03% return vs 2.74%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
FLOT is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.77% for MNA.
FLOT has the higher dividend yield at 4.54%, compared with 0.00% for MNA.
MNA is categorized as Hedge Fund, while FLOT is Ultrashort Bond. MNA tracks IQ Merger Arbitrage Index, while FLOT tracks Bloomberg US Floating Rate Note < 5 Years Index. They also come from different issuers: New York Life and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.77% for MNA and 0.15% for FLOT.
FLOT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (6.54 vs 0.95), 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.
Find the right allocation for MNA and FLOT
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