NVDS vs. FFLG

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

NVDS (Tradr 1.25X NVDA Bear Daily ETF) and FFLG (Fidelity Fundamental Large Cap Growth ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - NVDS is a Inverse Equities fund tracking the NVIDIA Corporation (-125%), while FFLG is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund actively managed by Fidelity. NVDS is passively managed, while FFLG is actively managed. Over the past 3 years, NVDS returned -64.99%/yr vs 29.35%/yr for FFLG. At a correlation of -0.79, they often move in opposite directions. NVDS charges 1.15%/yr vs 0.38%/yr for FFLG.

Performance

NVDS vs. FFLG - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Tradr 1.25X NVDA Bear Daily ETF (NVDS) and Fidelity Fundamental Large Cap Growth ETF (FFLG). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, NVDS achieves a -27.67% return, which is significantly lower than FFLG's 17.03% return.

NVDS

• 1D: -3.06%
• 1M: -17.14%
• YTD: -27.67%
• 6M: -29.84%
• 1Y: -54.87%
• 3Y*: -64.99%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

FFLG

• 1D: 0.46%
• 1M: 6.72%
• YTD: 17.03%
• 6M: 16.08%
• 1Y: 38.91%
• 3Y*: 29.35%
• 5Y*: 12.69%
• 10Y*: —

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

NVDS vs. FFLG - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
NVDS Tradr 1.25X NVDA Bear Daily ETF	-27.67%	-58.18%	-80.03%	-83.15%	-14.84%
FFLG Fidelity Fundamental Large Cap Growth ETF	17.03%	19.61%	32.29%	49.71%	-1.05%

Correlation

The correlation between NVDS and FFLG is -0.72, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.72
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	-0.77
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 15, 2022	-0.79

The correlation between NVDS and FFLG has been stable across timeframes, ranging from -0.79 to -0.72 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

NVDS vs. FFLG — Risk / Return Rank

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

NVDS

NVDS Risk / Return Rank: 1
NVDS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1
NVDS Sortino Ratio Rank: 1
NVDS Omega Ratio Rank: 1
NVDS Calmar Ratio Rank: 1
NVDS Martin Ratio Rank: 1

FFLG

FFLG Risk / Return Rank: 61
FFLG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 66
FFLG Sortino Ratio Rank: 61
FFLG Omega Ratio Rank: 61
FFLG Calmar Ratio Rank: 57
FFLG Martin Ratio Rank: 61

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.

NVDS vs. FFLG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Tradr 1.25X NVDA Bear Daily ETF (NVDS) and Fidelity Fundamental Large Cap Growth ETF (FFLG). 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.

	NVDS	FFLG	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-1.08	2.14	-3.22
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-1.72	2.82	-4.54
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.81	1.37	-0.56
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.92	2.75	-3.67
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-1.47	10.74	-12.22
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

NVDS vs. FFLG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current NVDS Sharpe Ratio is -1.08, which is lower than the FFLG Sharpe Ratio of 2.14. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of NVDS and FFLG, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	NVDS	FFLG	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-1.08	2.14	-3.22
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.50	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	-1.03	0.44	-1.47

Drawdowns

NVDS vs. FFLG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum NVDS drawdown since its inception was -99.40%, which is greater than FFLG's maximum drawdown of -44.52%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for NVDS and FFLG.

Drawdown Indicators

	NVDS	FFLG	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-99.40%	-44.52%	-54.88%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-59.88%	-14.23%	-45.65%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-96.32%	-26.72%	-69.60%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-44.52%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-99.34%	-0.44%	-98.90%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-83.41%	-14.26%	-69.15%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	37.24%	3.63%	+33.61%

Volatility

NVDS vs. FFLG - Volatility Comparison

Tradr 1.25X NVDA Bear Daily ETF (NVDS) has a higher volatility of 19.37% compared to Fidelity Fundamental Large Cap Growth ETF (FFLG) at 4.54%. This indicates that NVDS's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FFLG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	NVDS	FFLG	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	19.37%	4.54%	+14.83%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	38.74%	14.11%	+24.63%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	51.09%	18.28%	+32.81%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	68.86%	25.33%	+43.53%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	68.86%	25.38%	+43.48%

NVDS vs. FFLG - Expense Ratio Comparison

NVDS has a 1.15% expense ratio, which is higher than FFLG's 0.38% expense ratio.

Dividends

NVDS vs. FFLG - Dividend Comparison

NVDS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 19.62%, more than FFLG's 0.13% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
FFLG Fidelity Fundamental Large Cap Growth ETF	0.13%	0.14%	0.09%	0.00%	1.50%	0.55%
NVDS Tradr 1.25X NVDA Bear Daily ETF	19.62%	14.19%	14.11%	14.69%	5.72%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both NVDS and FFLG in my portfolio?

NVDS and FFLG have a correlation of -0.72, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, NVDS or FFLG?

NVDS has higher volatility (19.37%) compared to FFLG (4.54%). In terms of maximum drawdown, NVDS dropped -99.40% vs FFLG's -44.52%.

Which ETF is better, NVDS or FFLG?

On 3-year performance, FFLG leads with 29.35% vs -64.99% for NVDS. On fees, FFLG is cheaper at 0.38% per year. On volatility, FFLG has been the lower-risk option at 4.54%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, NVDS or FFLG?

Over the 3-year period, FFLG has performed better with a 29.35% return vs -64.99%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, NVDS or FFLG?

FFLG is cheaper with a 0.38% expense ratio, compared with 1.15% for NVDS.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, NVDS or FFLG?

NVDS has the higher dividend yield at 19.62%, compared with 0.13% for FFLG.

What is the main difference between NVDS and FFLG?

NVDS is categorized as Inverse Equities, while FFLG is Large Cap Growth Equities. They also come from different issuers: AXS and Fidelity. Their fees differ too: 1.15% for NVDS and 0.38% for FFLG.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FFLG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.14 vs -1.08), 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.