BCTK vs. NRGU
BCTK (Baron Technology ETF) and NRGU (MicroSectors U.S. Big Oil Index 3X Leveraged ETN) are both exchange-traded funds - BCTK is a Technology Equities fund actively managed by Baron Capital, while NRGU is a Leveraged Equities fund tracking the Solactive MicroSectors U.S. Big Oil Index (-300%). BCTK is actively managed, while NRGU is passively managed. At a correlation of -0.27, they often move in opposite directions. BCTK charges 0.75%/yr vs 0.95%/yr for NRGU.
Performance
BCTK vs. NRGU - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, BCTK achieves a 16.48% return, which is significantly lower than NRGU's 118.00% return.
BCTK
- 1D
- -3.12%
- 1M
- -6.91%
- 6M
- 14.99%
- YTD
- 16.48%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
NRGU
- 1D
- 3.84%
- 1M
- 18.77%
- 6M
- 86.19%
- YTD
- 118.00%
- 1Y
- 119.26%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
BCTK vs. NRGU - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
BCTK Baron Technology ETF | 16.48% | 0.84% |
NRGU MicroSectors U.S. Big Oil Index 3X Leveraged ETN | 118.00% | -10.85% |
Correlation
The correlation between BCTK and NRGU is -0.27, 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 (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 15, 2025 | -0.27 |
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
BCTK vs. NRGU — Risk / Return Rank
BCTK
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
NRGU
BCTK vs. NRGU - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Baron Technology ETF (BCTK) 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.
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.
| BCTK | NRGU | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | — | 1.26 | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | — | 2.73 | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | — | 6.13 | — |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
BCTK vs. NRGU - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum BCTK drawdown since its inception was -13.96%, smaller than the maximum NRGU drawdown of -57.50%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BCTK and NRGU.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| BCTK | NRGU | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -13.96% | -57.50% | +43.54% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | — | -43.89% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -9.92% | -24.81% | +14.89% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -3.42% | -26.06% | +22.64% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | — | 19.53% | — |
Volatility
BCTK vs. NRGU - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| BCTK | NRGU | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | — | 23.48% | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | — | 63.97% | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 31.09% | 76.98% | -45.89% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 31.09% | 89.07% | -57.98% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 31.09% | 89.07% | -57.98% |
BCTK vs. NRGU - Expense Ratio Comparison
BCTK has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is lower than NRGU's 0.95% expense ratio.
Dividends
BCTK vs. NRGU - Dividend Comparison
Neither BCTK nor NRGU has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
BCTK and NRGU have a correlation of -0.27, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, BCTK is cheaper at 0.75% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
BCTK is cheaper with a 0.75% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for NRGU.
BCTK and NRGU have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.
BCTK is categorized as Technology Equities, while NRGU is Leveraged Equities. They also come from different issuers: Baron Capital and BMO. Their fees differ too: 0.75% for BCTK and 0.95% for NRGU.
Find the right allocation for BCTK and NRGU
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