DEEP vs. FNGS

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

DEEP (Roundhill Acquirers Deep Value ETF) and FNGS (MicroSectors FANG+ ETN) are both exchange-traded funds - DEEP is a Small Cap Value Equities fund tracking the DEEP-US - Acquirers Deep Value Index, while FNGS is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund tracking the NYSE FANG+ Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, DEEP returned 5.26%/yr vs 18.21%/yr for FNGS. At a 0.43 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. DEEP charges 0.80%/yr vs 0.58%/yr for FNGS.

Performance

DEEP vs. FNGS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Roundhill Acquirers Deep Value ETF (DEEP) and MicroSectors FANG+ ETN (FNGS). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, DEEP achieves a 17.68% return, which is significantly higher than FNGS's 5.66% return.

DEEP

• 1D: 0.49%
• 1M: 5.91%
• YTD: 17.68%
• 6M: 17.12%
• 1Y: 31.10%
• 3Y*: 11.54%
• 5Y*: 5.26%
• 10Y*: 8.73%

FNGS

• 1D: -2.36%
• 1M: -3.57%
• YTD: 5.66%
• 6M: 4.04%
• 1Y: 17.25%
• 3Y*: 29.30%
• 5Y*: 18.21%
• 10Y*: —

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

DEEP vs. FNGS - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019
DEEP Roundhill Acquirers Deep Value ETF	17.68%	5.69%	-2.97%	22.37%	-17.71%	35.66%	-9.96%	1.47%
FNGS MicroSectors FANG+ ETN	5.66%	18.64%	51.99%	95.24%	-40.32%	16.96%	101.99%	10.10%

Correlation

The correlation between DEEP and FNGS is 0.30, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.30
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.33
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.48
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 13, 2019	0.43

The correlation between DEEP and FNGS shifts across timeframes, from 0.30 (1 year) to 0.48 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

DEEP vs. FNGS - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	DEEP	FNGS
Consumer Cyclical	26.6%	10.6%
Industrials	25.3%	-
Consumer Defensive	9.8%	-
Financial Services	9.2%	10.0%
Technology	8.5%	63.4%
Healthcare	7.0%	-
Energy	5.2%	-
Basic Materials	4.5%	-
Communication Services	3.9%	26.0%
Real Estate	3.1%	-
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

DEEP vs. FNGS — Risk / Return Rank

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

DEEP

DEEP Risk / Return Rank: 50
DEEP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 50
DEEP Sortino Ratio Rank: 53
DEEP Omega Ratio Rank: 44
DEEP Calmar Ratio Rank: 57
DEEP Martin Ratio Rank: 48

FNGS

FNGS Risk / Return Rank: 21
FNGS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 22
FNGS Sortino Ratio Rank: 22
FNGS Omega Ratio Rank: 21
FNGS Calmar Ratio Rank: 18
FNGS Martin Ratio Rank: 19

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.

DEEP vs. FNGS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Roundhill Acquirers Deep Value ETF (DEEP) and MicroSectors FANG+ ETN (FNGS). 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.

Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.

	DEEP	FNGS	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.62	0.77	+0.85
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.37	1.18	+1.19
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.27	1.15	+0.12
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.63	0.76	+1.88
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	7.56	2.12	+5.44

DEEP vs. FNGS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current DEEP Sharpe Ratio is 1.62, which is higher than the FNGS Sharpe Ratio of 0.77. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of DEEP and FNGS, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

DEEP vs. FNGS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum DEEP drawdown since its inception was -52.52%, which is greater than FNGS's maximum drawdown of -48.98%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for DEEP and FNGS.

Drawdown Indicators

	DEEP	FNGS	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-52.52%	-48.98%	-3.54%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-11.87%	-22.93%	+11.06%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-28.40%	-26.77%	-1.63%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-28.40%	-48.98%	+20.58%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-52.52%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.49%	-10.58%	+10.09%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-10.36%	-10.84%	+0.48%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.12%	8.14%	-4.02%

Volatility

DEEP vs. FNGS - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Roundhill Acquirers Deep Value ETF (DEEP) is 4.88%, while MicroSectors FANG+ ETN (FNGS) has a volatility of 10.97%. This indicates that DEEP experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FNGS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	DEEP	FNGS	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.88%	10.97%	-6.09%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	12.29%	18.01%	-5.72%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	19.29%	22.63%	-3.34%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	21.63%	30.25%	-8.62%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	24.25%	31.24%	-6.99%

DEEP vs. FNGS - Expense Ratio Comparison

DEEP has a 0.80% expense ratio, which is higher than FNGS's 0.58% expense ratio.

Dividends

DEEP vs. FNGS - Dividend Comparison

DEEP's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.45%, while FNGS has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
DEEP Roundhill Acquirers Deep Value ETF	1.45%	1.78%	1.96%	1.67%	1.28%	1.43%	4.03%	3.49%	1.51%	2.01%	3.14%	3.98%
FNGS MicroSectors FANG+ ETN	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both DEEP and FNGS in my portfolio?

DEEP and FNGS have a correlation of 0.30, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, DEEP or FNGS?

FNGS has higher volatility (10.97%) compared to DEEP (4.88%). In terms of maximum drawdown, DEEP dropped -52.52% vs FNGS's -48.98%.

Which ETF is better, DEEP or FNGS?

On 5-year performance, FNGS leads with 18.21% vs 5.26% for DEEP. On fees, FNGS is cheaper at 0.58% per year. On volatility, DEEP has been the lower-risk option at 4.88%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, DEEP or FNGS?

Over the 5-year period, FNGS has performed better with a 18.21% return vs 5.26%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, DEEP or FNGS?

FNGS is cheaper with a 0.58% expense ratio, compared with 0.80% for DEEP.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, DEEP or FNGS?

DEEP has the higher dividend yield at 1.45%, compared with 0.00% for FNGS.

What is the main difference between DEEP and FNGS?

DEEP is categorized as Small Cap Value Equities, while FNGS is Large Cap Growth Equities. DEEP tracks DEEP-US - Acquirers Deep Value Index, while FNGS tracks NYSE FANG+ Index. They also come from different issuers: Exchange Traded Concepts and BMO. Their fees differ too: 0.80% for DEEP and 0.58% for FNGS.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

DEEP currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.62 vs 0.77), 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.