WTID vs. FLYD

Last updated Jun 25, 2026

WTID (MicroSectors Energy -3X Inverse Leveraged ETN) and FLYD (MicroSectors Travel -3X Inverse Leveraged ETNs) are both Inverse Equities funds from REX - WTID tracks the Solactive MicroSectors Energy Index - Benchmark TR Gross (--300%) while FLYD tracks the MerQube MicroSectors U.S. Travel Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, WTID returned -45.26%/yr vs -56.79%/yr for FLYD. At a 0.13 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. Both charge a 0.95% expense ratio.

Performance

WTID vs. FLYD - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in MicroSectors Energy -3X Inverse Leveraged ETN (WTID) and MicroSectors Travel -3X Inverse Leveraged ETNs (FLYD). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, WTID achieves a -51.19% return, which is significantly lower than FLYD's -32.89% return.

WTID

• 1D: 5.01%
• 1M: 26.91%
• YTD: -51.19%
• 6M: -52.60%
• 1Y: -61.21%
• 3Y*: -45.26%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

FLYD

• 1D: -9.30%
• 1M: -31.47%
• YTD: -32.89%
• 6M: -29.32%
• 1Y: -55.37%
• 3Y*: -56.79%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

WTID vs. FLYD - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
WTID MicroSectors Energy -3X Inverse Leveraged ETN	-51.19%	-44.50%	-7.93%	-16.93%
FLYD MicroSectors Travel -3X Inverse Leveraged ETNs	-32.89%	-60.42%	-54.13%	-42.44%

Correlation

The correlation between WTID and FLYD is -0.18, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.18
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.08
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 15, 2023	0.13

The correlation between WTID and FLYD shifts across timeframes, from -0.18 (1 year) to 0.13 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

WTID vs. FLYD - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	WTID	FLYD
Energy	100.0%	-
Basic Materials	-	-
Communication Services	-	7.8%
Consumer Cyclical	-	51.1%
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Financial Services	-	-
Healthcare	-	-
Industrials	-	27.8%
Real Estate	-	0.1%
Technology	-	13.2%
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

WTID vs. FLYD — Risk / Return Rank

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

WTID

WTID Risk / Return Rank: 2
WTID Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2
WTID Sortino Ratio Rank: 2
WTID Omega Ratio Rank: 2
WTID Calmar Ratio Rank: 2
WTID Martin Ratio Rank: 2

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.

WTID vs. FLYD - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for MicroSectors Energy -3X Inverse Leveraged ETN (WTID) 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.

	WTID	FLYD	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.91	-0.73	-0.18
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-1.51	-0.90	-0.61
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.84	0.89	-0.05
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.82	-0.98	+0.16
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-1.39	-1.86	+0.47

WTID vs. FLYD - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current WTID Sharpe Ratio is -0.91, which is comparable to the FLYD Sharpe Ratio of -0.73. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of WTID 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

WTID vs. FLYD - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum WTID drawdown since its inception was -90.35%, smaller than the maximum FLYD drawdown of -98.45%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for WTID and FLYD.

Drawdown Indicators

	WTID	FLYD	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-90.35%	-98.45%	+8.10%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-74.87%	-56.92%	-17.95%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-88.44%	-94.61%	+6.17%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-85.62%	-98.45%	+12.83%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-54.92%	-83.25%	+28.33%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	44.18%	29.82%	+14.36%

Volatility

WTID vs. FLYD - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for MicroSectors Energy -3X Inverse Leveraged ETN (WTID) is 22.23%, while MicroSectors Travel -3X Inverse Leveraged ETNs (FLYD) has a volatility of 25.88%. This indicates that WTID experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FLYD based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	WTID	FLYD	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	22.23%	25.88%	-3.65%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	54.62%	62.99%	-8.37%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	67.44%	76.25%	-8.81%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	70.50%	83.85%	-13.35%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	70.50%	83.85%	-13.35%

WTID vs. FLYD - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both WTID and FLYD have an expense ratio of 0.95%.

Dividends

WTID vs. FLYD - Dividend Comparison

Neither WTID nor FLYD has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both WTID and FLYD in my portfolio?

WTID and FLYD have a correlation of -0.18, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, WTID or FLYD?

FLYD has higher volatility (25.88%) compared to WTID (22.23%). In terms of maximum drawdown, WTID dropped -90.35% vs FLYD's -98.45%.

Which ETF is better, WTID or FLYD?

On 3-year performance, WTID leads with -45.26% vs -56.79% for FLYD. Both ETFs have the same 0.95% expense ratio. On volatility, WTID has been the lower-risk option at 22.23%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, WTID or FLYD?

Over the 3-year period, WTID has performed better with a -45.26% return vs -56.79%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, WTID or FLYD?

WTID and FLYD have the same expense ratio: 0.95% per year.

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

WTID and FLYD have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

What is the main difference between WTID and FLYD?

WTID tracks Solactive MicroSectors Energy Index - Benchmark TR Gross (--300%), while FLYD tracks MerQube MicroSectors U.S. Travel Index.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FLYD currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (-0.73 vs -0.91), 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.