BNKU vs. FNGO

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

BNKU (MicroSectors U.S. Big Banks Index 3X Leveraged ETNs) and FNGO (MicroSectors FANG+ Index 2X Leveraged ETN) are both Leveraged Equities funds from Bank of Montreal - BNKU tracks the Solactive MicroSectors U.S. Big Banks Index (-300%) while FNGO tracks the NYSE FANG+ Index (+200%). Both are passively managed. Over the past year, BNKU returned 85.57% vs 54.81% for FNGO. At a 0.49 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. Both charge a 0.95% expense ratio.

Performance

BNKU vs. FNGO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in MicroSectors U.S. Big Banks Index 3X Leveraged ETNs (BNKU) and MicroSectors FANG+ Index 2X Leveraged ETN (FNGO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BNKU achieves a -1.60% return, which is significantly lower than FNGO's 29.63% return.

BNKU

• 1D: -3.18%
• 1M: 6.20%
• YTD: -1.60%
• 6M: 10.64%
• 1Y: 85.57%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

FNGO

• 1D: -2.35%
• 1M: 23.13%
• YTD: 29.63%
• 6M: 17.47%
• 1Y: 54.81%
• 3Y*: 62.64%
• 5Y*: 30.44%
• 10Y*: —

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

BNKU vs. FNGO - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
BNKU MicroSectors U.S. Big Banks Index 3X Leveraged ETNs	-1.60%	46.04%
FNGO MicroSectors FANG+ Index 2X Leveraged ETN	29.63%	16.65%

Correlation

The correlation between BNKU and FNGO is 0.38, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.38
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 21, 2025	0.49

The correlation between BNKU and FNGO shifts across timeframes, from 0.38 (1 year) to 0.49 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

BNKU vs. FNGO - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	BNKU	FNGO
Financial Services	100.0%	10.0%
Basic Materials	-	-
Communication Services	-	28.8%
Consumer Cyclical	-	11.3%
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Energy	-	-
Healthcare	-	-
Industrials	-	-
Real Estate	-	-
Technology	-	59.9%
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

BNKU vs. FNGO — Risk / Return Rank

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

BNKU

BNKU Risk / Return Rank: 39
BNKU Sharpe Ratio Rank: 43
BNKU Sortino Ratio Rank: 37
BNKU Omega Ratio Rank: 39
BNKU Calmar Ratio Rank: 43
BNKU Martin Ratio Rank: 36

FNGO

FNGO Risk / Return Rank: 32
FNGO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 38
FNGO Sortino Ratio Rank: 36
FNGO Omega Ratio Rank: 35
FNGO Calmar Ratio Rank: 26
FNGO Martin Ratio Rank: 25

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.

BNKU vs. FNGO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for MicroSectors U.S. Big Banks Index 3X Leveraged ETNs (BNKU) and MicroSectors FANG+ Index 2X Leveraged ETN (FNGO). 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.

	BNKU	FNGO	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.52	1.39	+0.12
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.96	1.94	+0.02
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.26	1.24	+0.02
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.10	1.29	+0.81
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	5.55	3.39	+2.16
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

BNKU vs. FNGO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BNKU Sharpe Ratio is 1.52, which is comparable to the FNGO Sharpe Ratio of 1.39. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BNKU and FNGO, 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

	BNKU	FNGO	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.52	1.39	+0.12
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.51	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.45	0.67	-0.22

Drawdowns

BNKU vs. FNGO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BNKU drawdown since its inception was -58.03%, smaller than the maximum FNGO drawdown of -78.39%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BNKU and FNGO.

Drawdown Indicators

	BNKU	FNGO	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-58.03%	-78.39%	+20.36%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-40.97%	-42.73%	+1.76%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-47.64%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-78.39%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-16.59%	-2.94%	-13.65%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-16.56%	-23.91%	+7.35%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	15.48%	16.21%	-0.73%

Volatility

BNKU vs. FNGO - Volatility Comparison

MicroSectors U.S. Big Banks Index 3X Leveraged ETNs (BNKU) has a higher volatility of 13.86% compared to MicroSectors FANG+ Index 2X Leveraged ETN (FNGO) at 11.29%. This indicates that BNKU's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FNGO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	BNKU	FNGO	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	13.86%	11.29%	+2.57%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	45.02%	30.58%	+14.44%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	56.70%	39.56%	+17.14%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	72.86%	60.24%	+12.62%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	72.86%	61.54%	+11.32%

BNKU vs. FNGO - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both BNKU and FNGO have an expense ratio of 0.95%.

Dividends

BNKU vs. FNGO - Dividend Comparison

Neither BNKU nor FNGO has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both BNKU and FNGO in my portfolio?

BNKU and FNGO have a correlation of 0.38, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, BNKU or FNGO?

BNKU has higher volatility (13.86%) compared to FNGO (11.29%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BNKU dropped -58.03% vs FNGO's -78.39%.

Which ETF is better, BNKU or FNGO?

On 1-year performance, BNKU leads with 85.57% vs 54.81% for FNGO. Both ETFs have the same 0.95% expense ratio. On volatility, FNGO has been the lower-risk option at 11.29%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, BNKU or FNGO?

Over the 1-year period, BNKU has performed better with a 85.57% return vs 54.81%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, BNKU or FNGO?

BNKU and FNGO have the same expense ratio: 0.95% per year.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, BNKU or FNGO?

BNKU and FNGO have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

What is the main difference between BNKU and FNGO?

BNKU tracks Solactive MicroSectors U.S. Big Banks Index (-300%), while FNGO tracks NYSE FANG+ Index (+200%).

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

BNKU currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.52 vs 1.39), 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.