RSBA vs. FFUT

Last updated Aug 1, 2026

RSBA (Return Stacked Bonds & Merger Arbitrage ETF) and FFUT (Fidelity Managed Futures ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - RSBA is a Leveraged Bonds fund actively managed by Return Stacked, while FFUT is a Systematic Trend fund actively managed by Fidelity. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, RSBA returned 1.14% vs 23.75% for FFUT. Their -0.34 correlation means they have often moved in opposite directions in the past. RSBA charges 0.96%/yr vs 0.80%/yr for FFUT.

Performance

RSBA vs. FFUT - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Return Stacked Bonds & Merger Arbitrage ETF (RSBA) and Fidelity Managed Futures ETF (FFUT). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, RSBA achieves a -0.94% return, which is significantly lower than FFUT's 13.58% return.

RSBA

• 1D: -0.53%
• 1M: -1.93%
• 6M: -1.22%
• YTD: -0.94%
• 1Y: 1.14%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 4.04%

FFUT

• 1D: -0.23%
• 1M: 5.46%
• 6M: 9.55%
• YTD: 13.58%
• 1Y: 23.75%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 19.94%

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
FFUT Fidelity Managed Futures ETF	$7.77M	$4.00M	$2.01M
RSBA Return Stacked Bonds & Merger Arbitrage ETF	$248.34K	$334.74K	$422.31K

RSBA vs. FFUT - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
RSBA Return Stacked Bonds & Merger Arbitrage ETF	-0.94%	4.17%
FFUT Fidelity Managed Futures ETF	13.58%	8.58%

Correlation

The correlation between RSBA and FFUT is -0.35, meaning they have often moved in opposite directions in the past. This relationship can weaken or reverse as market conditions change.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	-0.35
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 5, 2025	-0.34

Return for Risk

RSBA vs. FFUT — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

RSBA

RSBA Risk / Return Rank: 22
RSBA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 21
RSBA Sortino Ratio Rank: 20
RSBA Omega Ratio Rank: 19
RSBA Calmar Ratio Rank: 24
RSBA Martin Ratio Rank: 25

FFUT

FFUT Risk / Return Rank: 88
FFUT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 86
FFUT Sortino Ratio Rank: 86
FFUT Omega Ratio Rank: 87
FFUT Calmar Ratio Rank: 92
FFUT Martin Ratio Rank: 90

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

RSBA vs. FFUT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Return Stacked Bonds & Merger Arbitrage ETF (RSBA) and Fidelity Managed Futures ETF (FFUT). 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.

	RSBA	FFUT	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.45	2.02	-1.58
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.67	2.85	-2.17
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.08	1.38	-0.31
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.75	4.20	-3.46
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	1.89	14.36	-12.46

RSBA vs. FFUT - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RSBA Sharpe Ratio is 0.45, which is lower than the FFUT Sharpe Ratio of 2.02. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RSBA and FFUT, 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

RSBA vs. FFUT - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RSBA drawdown since its inception was -2.83%, smaller than the maximum FFUT drawdown of -5.59%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RSBA and FFUT.

Drawdown Indicators

	RSBA	FFUT	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-2.83%	-5.59%	+2.76%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-2.74%	-5.59%	+2.85%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.25%	-1.43%	-0.82%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.83%	-1.11%	+0.28%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.08%	1.63%	-0.55%

Volatility

RSBA vs. FFUT - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Return Stacked Bonds & Merger Arbitrage ETF (RSBA) is 1.36%, while Fidelity Managed Futures ETF (FFUT) has a volatility of 3.61%. This indicates that RSBA experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FFUT based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	RSBA	FFUT	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.36%	3.61%	-2.25%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	3.60%	9.27%	-5.67%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	4.57%	11.67%	-7.10%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	5.05%	11.09%	-6.04%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	5.05%	11.09%	-6.04%

RSBA vs. FFUT - Expense Ratio Comparison

RSBA has a 0.96% expense ratio, which is higher than FFUT's 0.80% expense ratio.

Dividends

RSBA vs. FFUT - Dividend Comparison

RSBA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.40%, more than FFUT's 1.84% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024
FFUT Fidelity Managed Futures ETF	1.84%	2.09%	0.00%
RSBA Return Stacked Bonds & Merger Arbitrage ETF	3.40%	3.37%	0.01%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both RSBA and FFUT in my portfolio?

RSBA and FFUT have a correlation of -0.35, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, RSBA or FFUT?

FFUT has higher volatility (3.61%) compared to RSBA (1.36%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RSBA dropped -2.83% vs FFUT's -5.59%.

Which ETF is better, RSBA or FFUT?

On 1-year performance, FFUT leads with 23.75% vs 1.14% for RSBA. On fees, FFUT is cheaper at 0.80% per year. On volatility, RSBA has been the lower-risk option at 1.36%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, RSBA or FFUT?

Over the 1-year period, FFUT has performed better with a 23.75% return vs 1.14%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, RSBA or FFUT?

FFUT is cheaper with a 0.80% expense ratio, compared with 0.96% for RSBA.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, RSBA or FFUT?

RSBA has the higher dividend yield at 3.40%, compared with 1.84% for FFUT.

What is the main difference between RSBA and FFUT?

RSBA is categorized as Leveraged Bonds, while FFUT is Systematic Trend. They also come from different issuers: Return Stacked and Fidelity. Their fees differ too: 0.96% for RSBA and 0.80% for FFUT.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FFUT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.02 vs 0.45), 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.