BNKU vs. NRGU

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

BNKU (MicroSectors U.S. Big Banks Index 3X Leveraged ETNs) and NRGU (MicroSectors U.S. Big Oil Index 3X Leveraged ETN) are both Leveraged Equities funds - BNKU tracks the Solactive MicroSectors U.S. Big Banks Index (-300%) while NRGU tracks the Solactive MicroSectors U.S. Big Oil Index (-300%). Both are passively managed. Over the past year, BNKU returned 107.99% vs 171.19% for NRGU. At a 0.16 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. Both charge a 0.95% expense ratio.

Performance

BNKU vs. NRGU - 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 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, BNKU achieves a 8.32% return, which is significantly lower than NRGU's 125.94% return.

BNKU

• 1D: 10.09%
• 1M: 13.36%
• YTD: 8.32%
• 6M: 19.85%
• 1Y: 107.99%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

NRGU

• 1D: -1.47%
• 1M: -6.46%
• YTD: 125.94%
• 6M: 93.16%
• 1Y: 171.19%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

BNKU vs. NRGU - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
BNKU MicroSectors U.S. Big Banks Index 3X Leveraged ETNs	8.32%	46.04%
NRGU MicroSectors U.S. Big Oil Index 3X Leveraged ETN	125.94%	-33.00%

Correlation

The correlation between BNKU and NRGU is 0.01, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.01
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 21, 2025	0.16

The correlation between BNKU and NRGU shifts across timeframes, from 0.01 (1 year) to 0.16 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

BNKU vs. NRGU - Sectors Allocation Comparison

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

Return for Risk

BNKU vs. NRGU — Risk / Return Rank

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

BNKU

BNKU Risk / Return Rank: 50
BNKU Sharpe Ratio Rank: 56
BNKU Sortino Ratio Rank: 46
BNKU Omega Ratio Rank: 48
BNKU Calmar Ratio Rank: 54
BNKU Martin Ratio Rank: 44

NRGU

NRGU Risk / Return Rank: 64
NRGU Sharpe Ratio Rank: 72
NRGU Sortino Ratio Rank: 53
NRGU Omega Ratio Rank: 53
NRGU Calmar Ratio Rank: 82
NRGU Martin Ratio Rank: 61

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. NRGU - 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 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.

	BNKU	NRGU	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.89	2.31	-0.42
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.26	2.55	-0.30
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.30	1.32	-0.03
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.65	4.31	-1.66
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	7.00	10.74	-3.74
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. NRGU - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BNKU Sharpe Ratio is 1.89, which is comparable to the NRGU Sharpe Ratio of 2.31. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BNKU 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

	BNKU	NRGU	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.89	2.31	-0.42
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.59	0.43	+0.16

Drawdowns

BNKU vs. NRGU - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BNKU drawdown since its inception was -58.03%, roughly equal to the maximum NRGU drawdown of -57.50%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BNKU and NRGU.

Drawdown Indicators

	BNKU	NRGU	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-58.03%	-57.50%	-0.53%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-40.97%	-39.95%	-1.02%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-8.18%	-22.07%	+13.89%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-16.53%	-25.41%	+8.88%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	15.49%	16.01%	-0.52%

Volatility

BNKU vs. NRGU - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for MicroSectors U.S. Big Banks Index 3X Leveraged ETNs (BNKU) is 16.53%, while MicroSectors U.S. Big Oil Index 3X Leveraged ETN (NRGU) has a volatility of 31.62%. This indicates that BNKU 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

	BNKU	NRGU	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	16.53%	31.62%	-15.09%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	46.00%	61.19%	-15.19%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	57.51%	75.02%	-17.51%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	73.26%	89.03%	-15.77%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	73.26%	89.03%	-15.77%

BNKU vs. NRGU - Expense Ratio Comparison

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

Dividends

BNKU vs. NRGU - Dividend Comparison

Neither BNKU nor NRGU has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both BNKU and NRGU in my portfolio?

BNKU and NRGU have a correlation of 0.01, 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 NRGU?

NRGU has higher volatility (31.62%) compared to BNKU (16.53%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BNKU dropped -58.03% vs NRGU's -57.50%.

Which ETF is better, BNKU or NRGU?

On 1-year performance, NRGU leads with 171.19% vs 107.99% for BNKU. Both ETFs have the same 0.95% expense ratio. On volatility, BNKU has been the lower-risk option at 16.53%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, BNKU or NRGU?

Over the 1-year period, NRGU has performed better with a 171.19% return vs 107.99%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, BNKU or NRGU?

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

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

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

What is the main difference between BNKU and NRGU?

BNKU tracks Solactive MicroSectors U.S. Big Banks Index (-300%), while NRGU tracks Solactive MicroSectors U.S. Big Oil Index (-300%). They also come from different issuers: Bank of Montreal and BMO.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

NRGU currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.31 vs 1.89), 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.