AMZZ vs. NRGU

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

AMZZ (GraniteShares 2x Long AMZN Daily ETF) and NRGU (MicroSectors U.S. Big Oil Index 3X Leveraged ETN) are both Leveraged Equities funds. AMZZ is actively managed, while NRGU is passively managed. Over the past year, AMZZ returned 25.28% vs 156.99% for NRGU. At a 0.01 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. AMZZ charges 1.15%/yr vs 0.95%/yr for NRGU.

Performance

AMZZ vs. NRGU - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in GraniteShares 2x Long AMZN Daily ETF (AMZZ) and MicroSectors U.S. Big Oil Index 3X Leveraged ETN (NRGU). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, AMZZ achieves a 9.44% return, which is significantly lower than NRGU's 129.31% return.

AMZZ

• 1D: -5.02%
• 1M: -16.12%
• YTD: 9.44%
• 6M: 7.26%
• 1Y: 25.28%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

NRGU

• 1D: 2.53%
• 1M: -6.67%
• YTD: 129.31%
• 6M: 97.01%
• 1Y: 156.99%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

AMZZ vs. NRGU - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
AMZZ GraniteShares 2x Long AMZN Daily ETF	9.44%	-10.09%
NRGU MicroSectors U.S. Big Oil Index 3X Leveraged ETN	129.31%	-33.00%

Correlation

The correlation between AMZZ and NRGU is -0.14, 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	-0.14
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 21, 2025	0.01

The correlation between AMZZ and NRGU shifts across timeframes, from -0.14 (1 year) to 0.01 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

AMZZ vs. NRGU - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	AMZZ	NRGU
Consumer Cyclical	66.7%	-
Basic Materials	-	-
Communication Services	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Energy	-	100.0%
Financial Services	-	-
Healthcare	-	-
Industrials	-	-
Real Estate	-	-
Technology	-	-
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

AMZZ vs. NRGU — Risk / Return Rank

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

AMZZ

AMZZ Risk / Return Rank: 17
AMZZ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 15
AMZZ Sortino Ratio Rank: 19
AMZZ Omega Ratio Rank: 19
AMZZ Calmar Ratio Rank: 16
AMZZ Martin Ratio Rank: 15

NRGU

NRGU Risk / Return Rank: 58
NRGU Sharpe Ratio Rank: 62
NRGU Sortino Ratio Rank: 48
NRGU Omega Ratio Rank: 48
NRGU Calmar Ratio Rank: 77
NRGU Martin Ratio Rank: 56

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.

AMZZ vs. NRGU - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for GraniteShares 2x Long AMZN Daily ETF (AMZZ) and MicroSectors U.S. Big Oil Index 3X Leveraged ETN (NRGU). 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.

	AMZZ	NRGU	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.43	2.11	-1.68
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.99	2.43	-1.44
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.12	1.30	-0.18
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.61	3.95	-3.35
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	1.37	9.88	-8.51
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

AMZZ vs. NRGU - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current AMZZ Sharpe Ratio is 0.43, which is lower than the NRGU Sharpe Ratio of 2.11. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of AMZZ and NRGU, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	AMZZ	NRGU	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.43	2.11	-1.68
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.25	0.45	-0.20

Drawdowns

AMZZ vs. NRGU - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum AMZZ drawdown since its inception was -55.28%, roughly equal to the maximum NRGU drawdown of -57.50%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for AMZZ and NRGU.

Drawdown Indicators

	AMZZ	NRGU	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-55.28%	-57.50%	+2.22%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-41.97%	-39.95%	-2.02%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-18.02%	-20.91%	+2.89%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-20.21%	-25.42%	+5.21%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	18.49%	15.96%	+2.53%

Volatility

AMZZ vs. NRGU - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for GraniteShares 2x Long AMZN Daily ETF (AMZZ) is 14.66%, while MicroSectors U.S. Big Oil Index 3X Leveraged ETN (NRGU) has a volatility of 31.63%. This indicates that AMZZ experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than NRGU based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	AMZZ	NRGU	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	14.66%	31.63%	-16.97%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	40.44%	61.27%	-20.83%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	59.66%	75.15%	-15.49%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	62.82%	89.15%	-26.33%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	62.82%	89.15%	-26.33%

AMZZ vs. NRGU - Expense Ratio Comparison

AMZZ has a 1.15% expense ratio, which is higher than NRGU's 0.95% expense ratio.

Dividends

AMZZ vs. NRGU - Dividend Comparison

Neither AMZZ nor NRGU has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both AMZZ and NRGU in my portfolio?

AMZZ and NRGU have a correlation of -0.14, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, AMZZ or NRGU?

NRGU has higher volatility (31.63%) compared to AMZZ (14.66%). In terms of maximum drawdown, AMZZ dropped -55.28% vs NRGU's -57.50%.

Which ETF is better, AMZZ or NRGU?

On 1-year performance, NRGU leads with 156.99% vs 25.28% for AMZZ. On fees, NRGU is cheaper at 0.95% per year. On volatility, AMZZ has been the lower-risk option at 14.66%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, AMZZ or NRGU?

Over the 1-year period, NRGU has performed better with a 156.99% return vs 25.28%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, AMZZ or NRGU?

NRGU is cheaper with a 0.95% expense ratio, compared with 1.15% for AMZZ.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, AMZZ or NRGU?

AMZZ and NRGU have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

What is the main difference between AMZZ and NRGU?

They also come from different issuers: GraniteShares and BMO. Their fees differ too: 1.15% for AMZZ and 0.95% for NRGU.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

NRGU currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.11 vs 0.43), 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.