CEFD vs. FBGX

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

CEFD (ETRACS Monthly Pay 1.5x Leveraged Closed-End Fund Index ETN) and FBGX (UBS AG FI Enhanced Large Cap Growth ETN) are both exchange-traded funds - CEFD is a fund fund tracking the S-Network Composite Closed-End Fund Index (150%), while FBGX is a Leveraged Equities fund tracking the Russell 1000 Growth Index (200%). Both are passively managed. A 0.56 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. CEFD charges 0.95%/yr vs 1.29%/yr for FBGX.

Performance

CEFD vs. FBGX - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in ETRACS Monthly Pay 1.5x Leveraged Closed-End Fund Index ETN (CEFD) and UBS AG FI Enhanced Large Cap Growth ETN (FBGX). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

CEFD

• 1D: -0.98%
• 1M: 2.61%
• YTD: 6.26%
• 6M: 6.56%
• 1Y: 18.31%
• 3Y*: 15.60%
• 5Y*: 3.13%
• 10Y*: —

FBGX

• 1D: —
• 1M: —
• YTD: —
• 6M: —
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

CEFD vs. FBGX - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
CEFD ETRACS Monthly Pay 1.5x Leveraged Closed-End Fund Index ETN	6.26%	14.15%	20.06%	8.36%	-28.93%	22.09%	21.81%
FBGX UBS AG FI Enhanced Large Cap Growth ETN	0.00%	0.00%	35.73%	83.74%	-56.41%	57.04%	59.99%

Correlation

The correlation between CEFD and FBGX is 0.56, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.33
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.55
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 4, 2020	0.56

The correlation between CEFD and FBGX shifts across timeframes, from 0.33 (3 years) to 0.56 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

CEFD vs. FBGX — Risk / Return Rank

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

CEFD

CEFD Risk / Return Rank: 39
CEFD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 40
CEFD Sortino Ratio Rank: 39
CEFD Omega Ratio Rank: 45
CEFD Calmar Ratio Rank: 30
CEFD Martin Ratio Rank: 42

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.

CEFD vs. FBGX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ETRACS Monthly Pay 1.5x Leveraged Closed-End Fund Index ETN (CEFD) and UBS AG FI Enhanced Large Cap Growth ETN (FBGX). 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.

	CEFD	FBGX	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.43	—	—
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.03	—	—
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.29	—	—
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.47	—	—
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	6.84	—	—
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	CEFD	FBGX	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.43	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.18	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.52	—	—

Drawdowns

Drawdown Indicators

	CEFD	FBGX	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-36.95%	—	—
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-12.51%	—	—
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-21.76%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-36.95%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.14%	—	—
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-11.72%	—	—
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.68%	—	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	CEFD	FBGX	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.05%	—	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	11.27%	—	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	12.86%	—	—
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	17.93%	—	—
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	17.31%	—	—

CEFD vs. FBGX - Expense Ratio Comparison

CEFD has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is lower than FBGX's 1.29% expense ratio.

Dividends

CEFD vs. FBGX - Dividend Comparison

CEFD's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 14.58%, while FBGX has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
CEFD ETRACS Monthly Pay 1.5x Leveraged Closed-End Fund Index ETN	14.58%	14.88%	13.90%	14.76%	16.56%	10.31%	5.37%
FBGX UBS AG FI Enhanced Large Cap Growth ETN	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CEFD and FBGX in my portfolio?

CEFD and FBGX have a correlation of 0.56, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, CEFD or FBGX?

On fees, CEFD is cheaper at 0.95% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, CEFD or FBGX?

CEFD is cheaper with a 0.95% expense ratio, compared with 1.29% for FBGX.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, CEFD or FBGX?

CEFD has the higher dividend yield at 14.58%, compared with 0.00% for FBGX.

What is the main difference between CEFD and FBGX?

CEFD tracks S-Network Composite Closed-End Fund Index (150%), while FBGX tracks Russell 1000 Growth Index (200%). Their fees differ too: 0.95% for CEFD and 1.29% for FBGX.