QBTZ vs. FLYD
QBTZ (Defiance Daily Target 2X Short QBTS ETF) and FLYD (MicroSectors Travel -3X Inverse Leveraged ETNs) are both Inverse Equities funds. QBTZ is actively managed, while FLYD is passively managed. At a 0.34 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. QBTZ charges 1.29%/yr vs 0.95%/yr for FLYD.
Performance
QBTZ vs. FLYD - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, QBTZ achieves a -82.79% return, which is significantly lower than FLYD's -28.20% return.
QBTZ
- 1D
- 10.29%
- 1M
- 4.01%
- 6M
- -78.88%
- YTD
- -82.79%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
FLYD
- 1D
- -0.03%
- 1M
- -12.10%
- 6M
- -18.96%
- YTD
- -28.20%
- 1Y
- -39.46%
- 3Y*
- -51.90%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
QBTZ vs. FLYD - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
QBTZ Defiance Daily Target 2X Short QBTS ETF | -82.79% | -47.53% |
FLYD MicroSectors Travel -3X Inverse Leveraged ETNs | -28.20% | -12.80% |
Correlation
The correlation between QBTZ and FLYD is 0.34, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 7, 2025 | 0.34 |
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
QBTZ vs. FLYD — Risk / Return Rank
QBTZ
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
FLYD
QBTZ vs. FLYD - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Defiance Daily Target 2X Short QBTS ETF (QBTZ) and MicroSectors Travel -3X Inverse Leveraged ETNs (FLYD). 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.
| QBTZ | FLYD | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | — | 0.96 | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | — | -0.66 | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | — | -1.34 | — |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
QBTZ vs. FLYD - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum QBTZ drawdown since its inception was -96.03%, roughly equal to the maximum FLYD drawdown of -98.49%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QBTZ and FLYD.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| QBTZ | FLYD | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -96.03% | -98.49% | +2.46% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | — | -56.11% | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -94.73% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -94.02% | -98.34% | +4.32% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -60.50% | -83.41% | +22.91% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | — | 27.59% | — |
Volatility
QBTZ vs. FLYD - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| QBTZ | FLYD | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | — | 26.20% | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | — | 63.46% | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 229.09% | 76.00% | +153.09% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 229.09% | 83.62% | +145.47% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 229.09% | 83.62% | +145.47% |
QBTZ vs. FLYD - Expense Ratio Comparison
QBTZ has a 1.29% expense ratio, which is higher than FLYD's 0.95% expense ratio.
Dividends
QBTZ vs. FLYD - Dividend Comparison
Neither QBTZ nor FLYD has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
QBTZ and FLYD have a correlation of 0.34, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, FLYD is cheaper at 0.95% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
FLYD is cheaper with a 0.95% expense ratio, compared with 1.29% for QBTZ.
QBTZ and FLYD have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.
They also come from different issuers: Defiance ETFs and REX. Their fees differ too: 1.29% for QBTZ and 0.95% for FLYD.
Find the right allocation for QBTZ and FLYD
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