CANE vs. FNGU
Compare and contrast key facts about Teucrium Sugar Fund (CANE) and MicroSectors FANG+™ Index 3X Leveraged ETN (FNGU).
CANE and FNGU are both exchange-traded funds (ETFs), meaning they are traded on stock exchanges and can be bought and sold throughout the day. CANE is a passively managed fund by Teucrium that tracks the performance of the Teucrium Sugar Fund Benchmark. It was launched on Sep 19, 2011. FNGU is a passively managed fund by Bank of Montreal that tracks the performance of the NYSE FANG (TR) (300%). It was launched on Jan 22, 2018. Both CANE and FNGU are passive ETFs, meaning that they are not actively managed but aim to replicate the performance of the underlying index as closely as possible.
Scroll down to visually compare performance, riskiness, drawdowns, and other indicators and decide which better suits your portfolio: CANE or FNGU.
Key characteristics
| CANE | FNGU | |
|---|---|---|
| YTD Return | 1.69% | 122.56% |
| 1Y Return | -16.55% | 163.91% |
| 3Y Return (Ann) | 9.81% | 3.76% |
| 5Y Return (Ann) | 13.55% | 62.91% |
| Sharpe Ratio | -0.68 | 2.32 |
| Sortino Ratio | -0.87 | 2.55 |
| Omega Ratio | 0.90 | 1.34 |
| Calmar Ratio | -0.28 | 2.67 |
| Martin Ratio | -0.84 | 9.52 |
| Ulcer Index | 19.50% | 17.25% |
| Daily Std Dev | 23.85% | 70.87% |
| Max Drawdown | -81.30% | -92.34% |
| Current Drawdown | -52.07% | -7.37% |
Correlation
The correlation between CANE and FNGU is 0.06, which is considered to be low. This implies their price changes are not closely related. A low correlation is generally favorable for portfolio diversification, as it helps to reduce overall risk by spreading it across multiple assets with different performance patterns.
Performance
CANE vs. FNGU - Performance Comparison
In the year-to-date period, CANE achieves a 1.69% return, which is significantly lower than FNGU's 122.56% return. The chart below displays the growth of a $10,000 investment in both assets, with all prices adjusted for splits and dividends.
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
CANE vs. FNGU - Expense Ratio Comparison
CANE has a 1.88% expense ratio, which is higher than FNGU's 0.95% expense ratio.
Risk-Adjusted Performance
CANE vs. FNGU - Risk-Adjusted Performance Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Teucrium Sugar Fund (CANE) and MicroSectors FANG+™ Index 3X Leveraged ETN (FNGU). 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.
Dividends
CANE vs. FNGU - Dividend Comparison
Neither CANE nor FNGU has paid dividends to shareholders.
Drawdowns
CANE vs. FNGU - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CANE drawdown since its inception was -81.30%, smaller than the maximum FNGU drawdown of -92.34%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CANE and FNGU. For additional features, visit the drawdowns tool.
Volatility
CANE vs. FNGU - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Teucrium Sugar Fund (CANE) is 5.66%, while MicroSectors FANG+™ Index 3X Leveraged ETN (FNGU) has a volatility of 19.09%. This indicates that CANE experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FNGU based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.