AIQ vs. FNGS

Last updated Jun 13, 2026

AIQ (Global X Artificial Intelligence & Technology ETF) and FNGS (MicroSectors FANG+ ETN) are both exchange-traded funds - AIQ is a Technology Equities fund tracking the Indxx Artificial Intelligence & Big Data Index, while FNGS is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund tracking the NYSE FANG+ Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, AIQ returned 16.96%/yr vs 19.76%/yr for FNGS. Their correlation of 0.88 suggests significant overlap in exposure. AIQ charges 0.68%/yr vs 0.58%/yr for FNGS.

Performance

AIQ vs. FNGS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Global X Artificial Intelligence & Technology ETF (AIQ) and MicroSectors FANG+ ETN (FNGS). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, AIQ achieves a 25.84% return, which is significantly higher than FNGS's 6.79% return.

AIQ

• 1D: 0.08%
• 1M: 3.04%
• YTD: 25.84%
• 6M: 26.79%
• 1Y: 52.00%
• 3Y*: 32.14%
• 5Y*: 16.96%
• 10Y*: —

FNGS

• 1D: -0.94%
• 1M: -3.20%
• YTD: 6.79%
• 6M: 4.25%
• 1Y: 17.02%
• 3Y*: 29.80%
• 5Y*: 19.76%
• 10Y*: —

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

AIQ vs. FNGS - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019
AIQ Global X Artificial Intelligence & Technology ETF	25.84%	31.89%	24.11%	55.39%	-36.44%	17.09%	52.88%	6.00%
FNGS MicroSectors FANG+ ETN	6.79%	18.64%	51.99%	95.24%	-40.32%	16.96%	101.99%	10.10%

Correlation

The correlation between AIQ and FNGS is 0.80, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.80
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.84
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.88
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 13, 2019	0.88

The correlation between AIQ and FNGS has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.80 to 0.88 - a consistent structural relationship.

AIQ vs. FNGS - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	AIQ	FNGS
Technology	73.3%	59.9%
Communication Services	13.2%	28.8%
Consumer Cyclical	8.5%	11.3%
Industrials	4.2%	-
Healthcare	0.4%	-
Financial Services	0.4%	10.0%
Basic Materials	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Energy	-	-
Real Estate	-	-
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

AIQ vs. FNGS — Risk / Return Rank

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

AIQ

AIQ Risk / Return Rank: 69
AIQ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 74
AIQ Sortino Ratio Rank: 65
AIQ Omega Ratio Rank: 69
AIQ Calmar Ratio Rank: 72
AIQ Martin Ratio Rank: 66

FNGS

FNGS Risk / Return Rank: 23
FNGS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 25
FNGS Sortino Ratio Rank: 24
FNGS Omega Ratio Rank: 24
FNGS Calmar Ratio Rank: 20
FNGS Martin Ratio Rank: 20

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.

AIQ vs. FNGS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Global X Artificial Intelligence & Technology ETF (AIQ) and MicroSectors FANG+ ETN (FNGS). 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.

	AIQ	FNGS	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.06	0.79	+1.27
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.59	1.19	+1.40
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.35	1.15	+0.20
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.17	0.75	+2.43
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	10.43	2.12	+8.31

AIQ vs. FNGS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current AIQ Sharpe Ratio is 2.06, which is higher than the FNGS Sharpe Ratio of 0.79. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of AIQ and FNGS, 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

AIQ vs. FNGS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum AIQ drawdown since its inception was -44.66%, smaller than the maximum FNGS drawdown of -48.98%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for AIQ and FNGS.

Drawdown Indicators

	AIQ	FNGS	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-44.66%	-48.98%	+4.32%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-16.47%	-22.93%	+6.46%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-26.35%	-26.77%	+0.42%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-44.66%	-48.98%	+4.32%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-8.75%	-9.63%	+0.88%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-9.79%	-10.85%	+1.06%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	5.00%	8.05%	-3.05%

Volatility

AIQ vs. FNGS - Volatility Comparison

Global X Artificial Intelligence & Technology ETF (AIQ) has a higher volatility of 12.90% compared to MicroSectors FANG+ ETN (FNGS) at 8.74%. This indicates that AIQ's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FNGS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	AIQ	FNGS	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	12.90%	8.74%	+4.16%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	21.38%	17.19%	+4.19%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	25.31%	21.65%	+3.66%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	25.74%	30.10%	-4.36%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	25.71%	31.17%	-5.46%

AIQ vs. FNGS - Expense Ratio Comparison

AIQ has a 0.68% expense ratio, which is higher than FNGS's 0.58% expense ratio.

Dividends

AIQ vs. FNGS - Dividend Comparison

AIQ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.15%, while FNGS has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018
AIQ Global X Artificial Intelligence & Technology ETF	0.15%	0.18%	0.14%	0.16%	0.56%	0.15%	0.50%	0.51%	0.51%
FNGS MicroSectors FANG+ ETN	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both AIQ and FNGS in my portfolio?

AIQ and FNGS have a correlation of 0.80, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, AIQ or FNGS?

AIQ has higher volatility (12.90%) compared to FNGS (8.74%). In terms of maximum drawdown, AIQ dropped -44.66% vs FNGS's -48.98%.

Which ETF is better, AIQ or FNGS?

On 5-year performance, FNGS leads with 19.76% vs 16.96% for AIQ. On fees, FNGS is cheaper at 0.58% per year. On volatility, FNGS has been the lower-risk option at 8.74%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, AIQ or FNGS?

Over the 5-year period, FNGS has performed better with a 19.76% return vs 16.96%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, AIQ or FNGS?

FNGS is cheaper with a 0.58% expense ratio, compared with 0.68% for AIQ.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, AIQ or FNGS?

AIQ has the higher dividend yield at 0.15%, compared with 0.00% for FNGS.

What is the main difference between AIQ and FNGS?

AIQ is categorized as Technology Equities, while FNGS is Large Cap Growth Equities. AIQ tracks Indxx Artificial Intelligence & Big Data Index, while FNGS tracks NYSE FANG+ Index. They also come from different issuers: Global X and BMO. Their fees differ too: 0.68% for AIQ and 0.58% for FNGS.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

AIQ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.06 vs 0.79), 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.