PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
MNA vs. FTLS
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

MNA vs. FTLS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in IQ Merger Arbitrage ETF (MNA) and First Trust Long/Short Equity ETF (FTLS). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, MNA achieves a 1.26% return, which is significantly lower than FTLS's 5.34% return. Over the past 10 years, MNA has underperformed FTLS with an annualized return of 2.67%, while FTLS has yielded a comparatively higher 9.83% annualized return.


MNA

1D
-0.18%
1M
-0.11%
YTD
1.26%
6M
1.17%
1Y
3.69%
3Y*
5.62%
5Y*
1.74%
10Y*
2.67%

FTLS

1D
0.12%
1M
2.01%
YTD
5.34%
6M
5.22%
1Y
14.27%
3Y*
14.31%
5Y*
10.27%
10Y*
9.83%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

MNA vs. FTLS - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
MNA
IQ Merger Arbitrage ETF
1.26%8.59%4.93%0.18%-1.61%-3.24%2.72%4.70%2.13%5.97%
FTLS
First Trust Long/Short Equity ETF
5.34%9.09%18.80%16.94%-5.56%19.65%2.56%16.16%-4.81%14.41%

Correlation

The correlation between MNA and FTLS is 0.33, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


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

0.33

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

0.27

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.35

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.35

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 11, 2014

0.35

MNA vs. FTLS - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
MNA
FTLS

Industrials

22.3%
7.6%

Utilities

15.3%
0.9%

Financial Services

11.4%
19.9%

Healthcare

11.3%
8.4%

Basic Materials

10.3%
5.1%

Communication Services

9.2%
6.1%

Technology

8.3%
26.9%

Real Estate

5.1%
1.9%

Consumer Defensive

4.4%
6.5%

Consumer Cyclical

2.4%
9.5%

Energy

-

7.3%

Industrials

MNA
22.3%
FTLS
7.6%

Utilities

MNA
15.3%
FTLS
0.9%

Financial Services

MNA
11.4%
FTLS
19.9%

Healthcare

MNA
11.3%
FTLS
8.4%

Basic Materials

MNA
10.3%
FTLS
5.1%

Communication Services

MNA
9.2%
FTLS
6.1%

Technology

MNA
8.3%
FTLS
26.9%

Real Estate

MNA
5.1%
FTLS
1.9%

Consumer Defensive

MNA
4.4%
FTLS
6.5%

Consumer Cyclical

MNA
2.4%
FTLS
9.5%

Energy

MNA

-

FTLS
7.3%

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. FTLS — Risk / Return Rank

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

MNA
MNA Risk / Return Rank: 3232
Overall Rank
MNA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2222
Sharpe Ratio Rank
MNA Sortino Ratio Rank: 2121
Sortino Ratio Rank
MNA Omega Ratio Rank: 2121
Omega Ratio Rank
MNA Calmar Ratio Rank: 5353
Calmar Ratio Rank
MNA Martin Ratio Rank: 4141
Martin Ratio Rank

FTLS
FTLS Risk / Return Rank: 5858
Overall Rank
FTLS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5050
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FTLS Sortino Ratio Rank: 5252
Sortino Ratio Rank
FTLS Omega Ratio Rank: 5050
Omega Ratio Rank
FTLS Calmar Ratio Rank: 7474
Calmar Ratio Rank
FTLS Martin Ratio Rank: 6464
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.

MNA vs. FTLS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for IQ Merger Arbitrage ETF (MNA) and First Trust Long/Short Equity ETF (FTLS). 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.


MNAFTLSDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.97

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-1.39

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.14

1.32

-0.18

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.65

3.79

-1.13

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

6.64

11.78

-5.14

MNA vs. FTLS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MNA Sharpe Ratio is 0.78, which is lower than the FTLS Sharpe Ratio of 1.75. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MNA and FTLS, 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...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


MNAFTLSDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.78

1.75

-0.97

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.35

0.98

-0.63

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.41

0.87

-0.46

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.36

0.81

-0.45

Drawdowns

MNA vs. FTLS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MNA drawdown since its inception was -16.68%, smaller than the maximum FTLS drawdown of -20.54%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MNA and FTLS.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


MNAFTLSDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-16.68%

-20.54%

+3.86%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-1.40%

-3.79%

+2.39%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-3.01%

-11.69%

+8.68%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-10.45%

-11.69%

+1.24%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-16.68%

-20.54%

+3.86%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.06%

-0.03%

-1.03%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-2.83%

-2.69%

-0.14%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

0.56%

1.21%

-0.65%

Volatility

MNA vs. FTLS - Volatility Comparison

IQ Merger Arbitrage ETF (MNA) and First Trust Long/Short Equity ETF (FTLS) have volatilities of 1.85% and 1.81%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


MNAFTLSDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

1.85%

1.81%

+0.04%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

3.56%

5.65%

-2.09%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

4.74%

8.18%

-3.44%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

4.99%

10.55%

-5.56%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

6.55%

11.30%

-4.75%

MNA vs. FTLS - Expense Ratio Comparison

MNA has a 0.77% expense ratio, which is lower than FTLS's 1.60% expense ratio.


Dividends

MNA vs. FTLS - Dividend Comparison

MNA has not paid dividends to shareholders, while FTLS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.90%.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
FTLS
First Trust Long/Short Equity ETF
0.90%1.07%1.50%1.49%0.81%0.01%0.44%0.83%0.87%0.43%1.04%0.49%
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 FTLS have a correlation of 0.33, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

MNA has higher volatility (1.85%) compared to FTLS (1.81%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MNA dropped -16.68% vs FTLS's -20.54%.

On 10-year performance, FTLS leads with 9.83% vs 2.67% for MNA. On fees, MNA is cheaper at 0.77% per year. Their volatility is very similar. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, FTLS has performed better with a 9.83% return vs 2.67%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

MNA is cheaper with a 0.77% expense ratio, compared with 1.60% for FTLS.

FTLS has the higher dividend yield at 0.90%, compared with 0.00% for MNA.

MNA is categorized as Hedge Fund, while FTLS is Long-Short. They also come from different issuers: New York Life and First Trust. Their fees differ too: 0.77% for MNA and 1.60% for FTLS.

FTLS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.75 vs 0.78), 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 MNA and FTLS

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