MSTQ vs. QFLR

Last updated Jun 23, 2026

MSTQ (LHA Market State Tactical Q ETF) and QFLR (Innovator Nasdaq-100 Managed Floor ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - MSTQ is a Options Trading fund actively managed by Little Harbor Advisors, while QFLR is a Nasdaq-100 fund actively managed by Innovator. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, MSTQ returned 31.60% vs 24.99% for QFLR. Their correlation of 0.89 suggests significant overlap in exposure. MSTQ charges 1.59%/yr vs 0.89%/yr for QFLR.

Performance

MSTQ vs. QFLR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in LHA Market State Tactical Q ETF (MSTQ) and Innovator Nasdaq-100 Managed Floor ETF (QFLR). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, MSTQ achieves a 15.85% return, which is significantly higher than QFLR's 6.21% return.

MSTQ

• 1D: -0.37%
• 1M: 2.19%
• YTD: 15.85%
• 6M: 14.73%
• 1Y: 31.60%
• 3Y*: 22.64%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

QFLR

• 1D: 0.25%
• 1M: 0.52%
• YTD: 6.21%
• 6M: 6.00%
• 1Y: 24.99%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

MSTQ vs. QFLR - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
MSTQ LHA Market State Tactical Q ETF	15.85%	20.57%	14.83%
QFLR Innovator Nasdaq-100 Managed Floor ETF	6.21%	17.27%	16.30%

Correlation

The correlation between MSTQ and QFLR is 0.87, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.87
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 25, 2024	0.89

The correlation between MSTQ and QFLR has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.87 to 0.89 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

MSTQ vs. QFLR — Risk / Return Rank

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

MSTQ

MSTQ Risk / Return Rank: 57
MSTQ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 64
MSTQ Sortino Ratio Rank: 58
MSTQ Omega Ratio Rank: 61
MSTQ Calmar Ratio Rank: 53
MSTQ Martin Ratio Rank: 48

QFLR

QFLR Risk / Return Rank: 65
QFLR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 63
QFLR Sortino Ratio Rank: 59
QFLR Omega Ratio Rank: 65
QFLR Calmar Ratio Rank: 68
QFLR Martin Ratio Rank: 73

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.

MSTQ vs. QFLR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for LHA Market State Tactical Q ETF (MSTQ) and Innovator Nasdaq-100 Managed Floor ETF (QFLR). 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.

	MSTQ	QFLR	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.04	2.02	+0.02
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.69	2.69	-0.01
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.36	1.38	-0.02
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.56	3.30	-0.74
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	7.87	13.18	-5.31

MSTQ vs. QFLR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MSTQ Sharpe Ratio is 2.04, which is comparable to the QFLR Sharpe Ratio of 2.02. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MSTQ and QFLR, 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

MSTQ vs. QFLR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MSTQ drawdown since its inception was -31.05%, which is greater than QFLR's maximum drawdown of -13.97%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MSTQ and QFLR.

Drawdown Indicators

	MSTQ	QFLR	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-31.05%	-13.97%	-17.08%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-12.39%	-7.61%	-4.78%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-15.22%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.52%	-1.11%	-0.41%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-8.55%	-2.50%	-6.05%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.03%	1.90%	+2.13%

Volatility

MSTQ vs. QFLR - Volatility Comparison

LHA Market State Tactical Q ETF (MSTQ) has a higher volatility of 7.14% compared to Innovator Nasdaq-100 Managed Floor ETF (QFLR) at 5.94%. This indicates that MSTQ's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than QFLR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	MSTQ	QFLR	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	7.14%	5.94%	+1.20%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	12.07%	9.53%	+2.54%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	15.61%	12.47%	+3.14%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	19.01%	13.01%	+6.00%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	19.01%	13.01%	+6.00%

MSTQ vs. QFLR - Expense Ratio Comparison

MSTQ has a 1.59% expense ratio, which is higher than QFLR's 0.89% expense ratio.

Dividends

MSTQ vs. QFLR - Dividend Comparison

MSTQ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 12.06%, while QFLR has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023
MSTQ LHA Market State Tactical Q ETF	12.06%	13.97%	3.72%	0.77%
QFLR Innovator Nasdaq-100 Managed Floor ETF	0.00%	0.02%	0.03%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both MSTQ and QFLR in my portfolio?

MSTQ and QFLR have a correlation of 0.87, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, MSTQ or QFLR?

MSTQ has higher volatility (7.14%) compared to QFLR (5.94%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MSTQ dropped -31.05% vs QFLR's -13.97%.

Which ETF is better, MSTQ or QFLR?

On 1-year performance, MSTQ leads with 31.60% vs 24.99% for QFLR. On fees, QFLR is cheaper at 0.89% per year. On volatility, QFLR has been the lower-risk option at 5.94%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, MSTQ or QFLR?

Over the 1-year period, MSTQ has performed better with a 31.60% return vs 24.99%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, MSTQ or QFLR?

QFLR is cheaper with a 0.89% expense ratio, compared with 1.59% for MSTQ.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, MSTQ or QFLR?

MSTQ has the higher dividend yield at 12.06%, compared with 0.00% for QFLR.

What is the main difference between MSTQ and QFLR?

MSTQ is categorized as Options Trading, while QFLR is Nasdaq-100. They also come from different issuers: Little Harbor Advisors and Innovator. Their fees differ too: 1.59% for MSTQ and 0.89% for QFLR.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

MSTQ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.04 vs 2.02), 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.