QFLR vs. FFTY

Last updated Jun 25, 2026

QFLR (Innovator Nasdaq-100 Managed Floor ETF) and FFTY (Innovator IBD 50 ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - QFLR is a Nasdaq-100 fund actively managed by Innovator, while FFTY is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund tracking the IBD 50 Index. QFLR is actively managed, while FFTY is passively managed. Over the past year, QFLR returned 19.39% vs 34.13% for FFTY. A 0.69 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. QFLR charges 0.89%/yr vs 0.80%/yr for FFTY.

Performance

QFLR vs. FFTY - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Innovator Nasdaq-100 Managed Floor ETF (QFLR) and Innovator IBD 50 ETF (FFTY). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, QFLR achieves a 3.09% return, which is significantly lower than FFTY's 20.20% return.

QFLR

• 1D: -0.17%
• 1M: -2.43%
• YTD: 3.09%
• 6M: 2.26%
• 1Y: 19.39%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

FFTY

• 1D: -0.62%
• 1M: 4.74%
• YTD: 20.20%
• 6M: 17.09%
• 1Y: 34.13%
• 3Y*: 21.01%
• 5Y*: -0.65%
• 10Y*: 7.85%

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

QFLR vs. FFTY - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
QFLR Innovator Nasdaq-100 Managed Floor ETF	3.09%	17.27%	16.30%
FFTY Innovator IBD 50 ETF	20.20%	23.38%	16.07%

Correlation

The correlation between QFLR and FFTY is 0.66, 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	0.66
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 25, 2024	0.69

The correlation between QFLR and FFTY has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.66 to 0.69 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

QFLR vs. FFTY — Risk / Return Rank

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

QFLR

QFLR Risk / Return Rank: 53
QFLR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 50
QFLR Sortino Ratio Rank: 46
QFLR Omega Ratio Rank: 51
QFLR Calmar Ratio Rank: 58
QFLR Martin Ratio Rank: 62

FFTY

FFTY Risk / Return Rank: 29
FFTY Sharpe Ratio Rank: 28
FFTY Sortino Ratio Rank: 27
FFTY Omega Ratio Rank: 28
FFTY Calmar Ratio Rank: 32
FFTY Martin Ratio Rank: 30

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.

QFLR vs. FFTY - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Innovator Nasdaq-100 Managed Floor ETF (QFLR) and Innovator IBD 50 ETF (FFTY). 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.

	QFLR	FFTY	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.53	0.95	+0.58
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.06	1.37	+0.68
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.29	1.18	+0.11
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.56	1.47	+1.09
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	10.06	3.88	+6.18

QFLR vs. FFTY - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current QFLR Sharpe Ratio is 1.53, which is higher than the FFTY Sharpe Ratio of 0.95. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of QFLR and FFTY, 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

QFLR vs. FFTY - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QFLR drawdown since its inception was -13.97%, smaller than the maximum FFTY drawdown of -59.46%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QFLR and FFTY.

Drawdown Indicators

	QFLR	FFTY	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-13.97%	-59.46%	+45.49%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-7.61%	-23.29%	+15.68%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-29.60%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-59.46%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-59.46%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-4.02%	-15.28%	+11.26%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.51%	-22.34%	+19.83%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.93%	8.82%	-6.89%

Volatility

QFLR vs. FFTY - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Innovator Nasdaq-100 Managed Floor ETF (QFLR) is 6.55%, while Innovator IBD 50 ETF (FFTY) has a volatility of 13.46%. This indicates that QFLR experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FFTY based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	QFLR	FFTY	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.55%	13.46%	-6.91%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	9.85%	28.29%	-18.44%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	12.76%	36.00%	-23.24%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	13.12%	29.62%	-16.50%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	13.12%	27.66%	-14.54%

QFLR vs. FFTY - Expense Ratio Comparison

QFLR has a 0.89% expense ratio, which is higher than FFTY's 0.80% expense ratio.

Dividends

QFLR vs. FFTY - Dividend Comparison

QFLR has not paid dividends to shareholders, while FFTY's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.12%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
FFTY Innovator IBD 50 ETF	1.12%	1.35%	0.91%	0.65%	2.75%	0.22%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.17%
QFLR Innovator Nasdaq-100 Managed Floor ETF	0.00%	0.02%	0.03%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both QFLR and FFTY in my portfolio?

QFLR and FFTY have a correlation of 0.66, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, QFLR or FFTY?

FFTY has higher volatility (13.46%) compared to QFLR (6.55%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QFLR dropped -13.97% vs FFTY's -59.46%.

Which ETF is better, QFLR or FFTY?

On 1-year performance, FFTY leads with 34.13% vs 19.39% for QFLR. On fees, FFTY is cheaper at 0.80% per year. On volatility, QFLR has been the lower-risk option at 6.55%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, QFLR or FFTY?

Over the 1-year period, FFTY has performed better with a 34.13% return vs 19.39%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, QFLR or FFTY?

FFTY is cheaper with a 0.80% expense ratio, compared with 0.89% for QFLR.

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

FFTY has the higher dividend yield at 1.12%, compared with 0.00% for QFLR.

What is the main difference between QFLR and FFTY?

QFLR is categorized as Nasdaq-100, while FFTY is Large Cap Growth Equities. Their fees differ too: 0.89% for QFLR and 0.80% for FFTY.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

QFLR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.53 vs 0.95), 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.