QBF vs. MNRS

Last updated Jul 14, 2026

QBF (Innovator Uncapped Bitcoin 20 Floor ETF - Quarterly) and MNRS (Grayscale Bitcoin Miners ETF) are both Blockchain funds. QBF is actively managed, while MNRS is passively managed. Over the past year, QBF returned -44.95% vs 32.34% for MNRS. A 0.60 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. QBF charges 0.79%/yr vs 0.59%/yr for MNRS.

Performance

QBF vs. MNRS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Innovator Uncapped Bitcoin 20 Floor ETF - Quarterly (QBF) and Grayscale Bitcoin Miners ETF (MNRS). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, QBF achieves a -29.00% return, which is significantly lower than MNRS's 19.40% return.

QBF

• 1D: -1.99%
• 1M: -4.56%
• 6M: -30.71%
• YTD: -29.00%
• 1Y: -44.95%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

MNRS

• 1D: -4.89%
• 1M: -20.90%
• 6M: -3.22%
• YTD: 19.40%
• 1Y: 32.34%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

QBF vs. MNRS - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
QBF Innovator Uncapped Bitcoin 20 Floor ETF - Quarterly	-29.00%	-14.76%
MNRS Grayscale Bitcoin Miners ETF	19.40%	15.98%

Correlation

The correlation between QBF and MNRS is 0.57, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.57
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 6, 2025	0.60

The correlation between QBF and MNRS has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.57 to 0.60 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

QBF vs. MNRS — Risk / Return Rank

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

QBF

QBF Risk / Return Rank: 0
QBF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 0
QBF Sortino Ratio Rank: 0
QBF Omega Ratio Rank: 0
QBF Calmar Ratio Rank: 1
QBF Martin Ratio Rank: 0

MNRS

MNRS Risk / Return Rank: 19
MNRS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 18
MNRS Sortino Ratio Rank: 24
MNRS Omega Ratio Rank: 22
MNRS Calmar Ratio Rank: 18
MNRS Martin Ratio Rank: 16

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.

QBF vs. MNRS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Innovator Uncapped Bitcoin 20 Floor ETF - Quarterly (QBF) and Grayscale Bitcoin Miners ETF (MNRS). 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.

	QBF	MNRS	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-1.66	0.45	-2.11
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-2.62	1.11	-3.73
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.72	1.13	-0.41
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.93	0.57	-1.50
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-1.59	1.09	-2.68

QBF vs. MNRS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current QBF Sharpe Ratio is -1.66, which is lower than the MNRS Sharpe Ratio of 0.45. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of QBF and MNRS, 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

QBF vs. MNRS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QBF drawdown since its inception was -48.71%, smaller than the maximum MNRS drawdown of -56.70%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QBF and MNRS.

Drawdown Indicators

	QBF	MNRS	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-48.71%	-56.70%	+7.99%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-48.71%	-56.70%	+7.99%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-46.93%	-34.19%	-12.74%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-18.88%	-23.47%	+4.59%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	28.31%	29.77%	-1.46%

Volatility

QBF vs. MNRS - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Innovator Uncapped Bitcoin 20 Floor ETF - Quarterly (QBF) is 9.64%, while Grayscale Bitcoin Miners ETF (MNRS) has a volatility of 19.32%. This indicates that QBF experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than MNRS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	QBF	MNRS	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	9.64%	19.32%	-9.68%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	20.82%	52.95%	-32.13%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	27.28%	71.81%	-44.53%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	29.00%	70.76%	-41.76%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	29.00%	70.76%	-41.76%

QBF vs. MNRS - Expense Ratio Comparison

QBF has a 0.79% expense ratio, which is higher than MNRS's 0.59% expense ratio.

Dividends

QBF vs. MNRS - Dividend Comparison

QBF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.95%, more than MNRS's 0.45% yield.

Position	TTM	2025
MNRS Grayscale Bitcoin Miners ETF	0.45%	0.54%
QBF Innovator Uncapped Bitcoin 20 Floor ETF - Quarterly	1.95%	1.38%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both QBF and MNRS in my portfolio?

QBF and MNRS have a correlation of 0.57, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, QBF or MNRS?

MNRS has higher volatility (19.32%) compared to QBF (9.64%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QBF dropped -48.71% vs MNRS's -56.70%.

Which ETF is better, QBF or MNRS?

On 1-year performance, MNRS leads with 32.34% vs -44.95% for QBF. On fees, MNRS is cheaper at 0.59% per year. On volatility, QBF has been the lower-risk option at 9.64%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, QBF or MNRS?

Over the 1-year period, MNRS has performed better with a 32.34% return vs -44.95%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, QBF or MNRS?

MNRS is cheaper with a 0.59% expense ratio, compared with 0.79% for QBF.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, QBF or MNRS?

QBF has the higher dividend yield at 1.95%, compared with 0.45% for MNRS.

What is the main difference between QBF and MNRS?

They also come from different issuers: Innovator and Grayscale. Their fees differ too: 0.79% for QBF and 0.59% for MNRS.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

MNRS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.45 vs -1.66), 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.