QRFT vs. HYP
QRFT (QRAFT AI Enhanced U.S. Large Cap ETF) and HYP (Golden Eagle Dynamic Hypergrowth ETF) are both Large Cap Growth Equities funds. Both are actively managed. A 0.70 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. QRFT charges 0.75%/yr vs 0.85%/yr for HYP.
Performance
QRFT vs. HYP - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, QRFT achieves a 12.70% return, which is significantly lower than HYP's 32.89% return.
QRFT
- 1D
- 0.08%
- 1M
- 5.38%
- YTD
- 12.70%
- 6M
- 12.87%
- 1Y
- 29.05%
- 3Y*
- 21.87%
- 5Y*
- 12.41%
- 10Y*
- —
HYP
- 1D
- 1.19%
- 1M
- 6.48%
- YTD
- 32.89%
- 6M
- 28.18%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
QRFT vs. HYP - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
QRFT QRAFT AI Enhanced U.S. Large Cap ETF | 12.70% | 3.10% |
HYP Golden Eagle Dynamic Hypergrowth ETF | 32.89% | -5.01% |
Correlation
The correlation between QRFT and HYP is 0.70, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 24, 2025 | 0.70 |
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
QRFT vs. HYP — Risk / Return Rank
QRFT
HYP
QRFT vs. HYP - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for QRAFT AI Enhanced U.S. Large Cap ETF (QRFT) and Golden Eagle Dynamic Hypergrowth ETF (HYP). 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.
| QRFT | HYP | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.40 | — | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.20 | — | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 14.15 | — | — |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| QRFT | HYP | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.23 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.72 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.86 | 0.98 | -0.12 |
Drawdowns
QRFT vs. HYP - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum QRFT drawdown since its inception was -30.19%, which is greater than HYP's maximum drawdown of -19.58%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QRFT and HYP.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| QRFT | HYP | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -30.19% | -19.58% | -10.61% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -9.12% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -19.99% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -28.20% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.26% | -1.11% | +0.85% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -6.79% | -6.42% | -0.37% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.06% | — | — |
Volatility
QRFT vs. HYP - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| QRFT | HYP | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 3.36% | — | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 9.96% | — | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 13.07% | 40.91% | -27.84% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 17.34% | 40.91% | -23.57% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 20.10% | 40.91% | -20.81% |
QRFT vs. HYP - Expense Ratio Comparison
QRFT has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is lower than HYP's 0.85% expense ratio.
Dividends
QRFT vs. HYP - Dividend Comparison
QRFT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.25%, more than HYP's 0.10% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
HYP Golden Eagle Dynamic Hypergrowth ETF | 0.10% | 0.14% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
QRFT QRAFT AI Enhanced U.S. Large Cap ETF | 0.25% | 0.27% | 0.52% | 0.77% | 0.83% | 0.05% | 1.81% | 4.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
QRFT and HYP have a correlation of 0.70, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, QRFT is cheaper at 0.75% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
QRFT is cheaper with a 0.75% expense ratio, compared with 0.85% for HYP.
QRFT has the higher dividend yield at 0.25%, compared with 0.10% for HYP.
They also come from different issuers: Exchange Traded Concepts and Golden Eagle. Their fees differ too: 0.75% for QRFT and 0.85% for HYP.
Find the right allocation for QRFT and HYP
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