QCMD vs. FLYD

Last updated Jun 26, 2026

QCMD (Direxion Daily QCOM Bear 1X Shares) and FLYD (MicroSectors Travel -3X Inverse Leveraged ETNs) are both Inverse Equities funds. Over the past year, QCMD returned -38.22% vs -55.29% for FLYD. At a 0.40 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. QCMD charges 1.00%/yr vs 0.95%/yr for FLYD.

Performance

QCMD vs. FLYD - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Direxion Daily QCOM Bear 1X Shares (QCMD) and MicroSectors Travel -3X Inverse Leveraged ETNs (FLYD). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both stocks are quite close, with QCMD having a -29.99% return and FLYD slightly lower at -30.35%.

QCMD

• 1D: -4.04%
• 1M: 14.28%
• YTD: -29.99%
• 6M: -28.41%
• 1Y: -38.22%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

FLYD

• 1D: 3.79%
• 1M: -24.33%
• YTD: -30.35%
• 6M: -26.65%
• 1Y: -55.29%
• 3Y*: -56.28%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

QCMD vs. FLYD - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
QCMD Direxion Daily QCOM Bear 1X Shares	-29.99%	-11.76%
FLYD MicroSectors Travel -3X Inverse Leveraged ETNs	-30.35%	-33.50%

Correlation

The correlation between QCMD and FLYD is 0.40, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.40
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 25, 2025	0.40

Return for Risk

QCMD vs. FLYD — Risk / Return Rank

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

QCMD

QCMD Risk / Return Rank: 3
QCMD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3
QCMD Sortino Ratio Rank: 4
QCMD Omega Ratio Rank: 3
QCMD Calmar Ratio Rank: 4
QCMD Martin Ratio Rank: 0

FLYD

FLYD Risk / Return Rank: 2
FLYD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4
FLYD Sortino Ratio Rank: 4
FLYD Omega Ratio Rank: 4
FLYD Calmar Ratio Rank: 0
FLYD Martin Ratio Rank: 0

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.

QCMD vs. FLYD - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Direxion Daily QCOM Bear 1X Shares (QCMD) 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.

	QCMD	FLYD	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.76	-0.73	-0.03
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-0.94	-0.90	-0.04
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.87	0.90	-0.03
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.68	-1.01	+0.32
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-1.77	-2.07	+0.30

QCMD vs. FLYD - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current QCMD Sharpe Ratio is -0.76, which is comparable to the FLYD Sharpe Ratio of -0.73. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of QCMD and FLYD, 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

QCMD vs. FLYD - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QCMD drawdown since its inception was -56.03%, smaller than the maximum FLYD drawdown of -98.45%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QCMD and FLYD.

Drawdown Indicators

	QCMD	FLYD	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-56.03%	-98.45%	+42.42%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-56.03%	-55.15%	-0.88%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-94.61%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-48.55%	-98.39%	+49.84%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-15.26%	-83.26%	+68.00%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	21.63%	30.03%	-8.40%

Volatility

QCMD vs. FLYD - Volatility Comparison

Direxion Daily QCOM Bear 1X Shares (QCMD) and MicroSectors Travel -3X Inverse Leveraged ETNs (FLYD) have volatilities of 24.90% and 26.01%, 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.

Volatility by Period

	QCMD	FLYD	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	24.90%	26.01%	-1.11%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	45.26%	62.95%	-17.69%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	50.35%	75.71%	-25.36%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	50.35%	83.83%	-33.48%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	50.35%	83.83%	-33.48%

QCMD vs. FLYD - Expense Ratio Comparison

QCMD has a 1.00% expense ratio, which is higher than FLYD's 0.95% expense ratio.

Dividends

QCMD vs. FLYD - Dividend Comparison

QCMD's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.27%, while FLYD has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025
FLYD MicroSectors Travel -3X Inverse Leveraged ETNs	0.00%	0.00%
QCMD Direxion Daily QCOM Bear 1X Shares	4.27%	1.77%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both QCMD and FLYD in my portfolio?

QCMD and FLYD have a correlation of 0.40, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, QCMD or FLYD?

FLYD has higher volatility (26.01%) compared to QCMD (24.90%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QCMD dropped -56.03% vs FLYD's -98.45%.

Which ETF is better, QCMD or FLYD?

On 1-year performance, QCMD leads with -38.22% vs -55.29% for FLYD. On fees, FLYD is cheaper at 0.95% per year. On volatility, QCMD has been the lower-risk option at 24.90%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, QCMD or FLYD?

Over the 1-year period, QCMD has performed better with a -38.22% return vs -55.29%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, QCMD or FLYD?

FLYD is cheaper with a 0.95% expense ratio, compared with 1.00% for QCMD.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, QCMD or FLYD?

QCMD has the higher dividend yield at 4.27%, compared with 0.00% for FLYD.

What is the main difference between QCMD and FLYD?

They also come from different issuers: Direxion and REX. Their fees differ too: 1.00% for QCMD and 0.95% for FLYD.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FLYD currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (-0.73 vs -0.76), 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.