BWET vs. NRGU

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

BWET (Breakwave Tanker Shipping ETF) and NRGU (MicroSectors U.S. Big Oil Index 3X Leveraged ETN) are both exchange-traded funds - BWET is a Commodities fund tracking the Breakwave Wet Freight Futures Index, while NRGU is a Leveraged Equities fund tracking the Solactive MicroSectors U.S. Big Oil Index (-300%). Both are passively managed. Over the past year, BWET returned 2014.90% vs 171.19% for NRGU. At a 0.06 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. BWET charges 3.50%/yr vs 0.95%/yr for NRGU.

Performance

BWET vs. NRGU - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Breakwave Tanker Shipping ETF (BWET) 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, BWET achieves a 990.13% return, which is significantly higher than NRGU's 125.94% return.

BWET

• 1D: 11.71%
• 1M: -0.90%
• YTD: 990.13%
• 6M: 857.64%
• 1Y: 2,014.90%
• 3Y*: 145.24%
• 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)

BWET vs. NRGU - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
BWET Breakwave Tanker Shipping ETF	990.13%	74.74%
NRGU MicroSectors U.S. Big Oil Index 3X Leveraged ETN	125.94%	-33.00%

Correlation

The correlation between BWET and NRGU is 0.05, 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	0.05
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 21, 2025	0.06

BWET vs. NRGU - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	BWET	NRGU
Financial Services	8.6%	-
Basic Materials	-	-
Communication Services	-	-
Consumer Cyclical	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Energy	-	100.0%
Healthcare	-	-
Industrials	-	-
Real Estate	-	-
Technology	-	-
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

BWET vs. NRGU — Risk / Return Rank

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

BWET

BWET Risk / Return Rank: 99
BWET Sharpe Ratio Rank: 100
BWET Sortino Ratio Rank: 98
BWET Omega Ratio Rank: 98
BWET Calmar Ratio Rank: 100
BWET Martin Ratio Rank: 99

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.

BWET vs. NRGU - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Breakwave Tanker Shipping ETF (BWET) 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.

	BWET	NRGU	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	20.67	2.31	+18.36
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	6.77	2.55	+4.22
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.99	1.32	+0.67
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	66.60	4.31	+62.29
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	176.91	10.74	+166.18
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

BWET vs. NRGU - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BWET Sharpe Ratio is 20.67, which is higher than the NRGU Sharpe Ratio of 2.31. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BWET 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

	BWET	NRGU	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	20.67	2.31	+18.36
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	2.01	0.43	+1.58

Drawdowns

BWET vs. NRGU - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BWET drawdown since its inception was -56.90%, roughly equal to the maximum NRGU drawdown of -57.50%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BWET and NRGU.

Drawdown Indicators

	BWET	NRGU	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-56.90%	-57.50%	+0.60%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-30.64%	-39.95%	+9.31%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-56.90%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.90%	-22.07%	+21.17%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-24.06%	-25.41%	+1.35%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	11.51%	16.01%	-4.50%

Volatility

BWET vs. NRGU - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Breakwave Tanker Shipping ETF (BWET) is 28.88%, while MicroSectors U.S. Big Oil Index 3X Leveraged ETN (NRGU) has a volatility of 31.62%. This indicates that BWET 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

	BWET	NRGU	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	28.88%	31.62%	-2.74%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	88.79%	61.19%	+27.60%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	98.73%	75.02%	+23.71%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	70.70%	89.03%	-18.33%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	70.70%	89.03%	-18.33%

BWET vs. NRGU - Expense Ratio Comparison

BWET has a 3.50% expense ratio, which is higher than NRGU's 0.95% expense ratio.

Dividends

BWET vs. NRGU - Dividend Comparison

Neither BWET nor NRGU has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both BWET and NRGU in my portfolio?

BWET and NRGU have a correlation of 0.05, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, BWET or NRGU?

NRGU has higher volatility (31.62%) compared to BWET (28.88%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BWET dropped -56.90% vs NRGU's -57.50%.

Which ETF is better, BWET or NRGU?

On 1-year performance, BWET leads with 2014.90% vs 171.19% for NRGU. On fees, NRGU is cheaper at 0.95% per year. On volatility, BWET has been the lower-risk option at 28.88%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, BWET or NRGU?

Over the 1-year period, BWET has performed better with a 2014.90% return vs 171.19%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, BWET or NRGU?

NRGU is cheaper with a 0.95% expense ratio, compared with 3.50% for BWET.

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

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

What is the main difference between BWET and NRGU?

BWET is categorized as Commodities, while NRGU is Leveraged Equities. BWET tracks Breakwave Wet Freight Futures Index, while NRGU tracks Solactive MicroSectors U.S. Big Oil Index (-300%). They also come from different issuers: Amplify and BMO. Their fees differ too: 3.50% for BWET and 0.95% for NRGU.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

BWET currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (20.67 vs 2.31), 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.