FBGX vs. CEFD

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

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

Performance

FBGX vs. CEFD - Performance Comparison

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

Returns By Period

FBGX

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

CEFD

• 1D: -0.83%
• 1M: 0.88%
• YTD: 5.55%
• 6M: 5.82%
• 1Y: 16.51%
• 3Y*: 14.99%
• 5Y*: 2.85%
• 10Y*: —

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

FBGX vs. CEFD - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
FBGX UBS AG FI Enhanced Large Cap Growth ETN	0.00%	0.00%	35.73%	83.74%	-56.41%	57.04%	62.50%
CEFD ETRACS Monthly Pay 1.5x Leveraged Closed-End Fund Index ETN	5.55%	14.15%	20.06%	8.36%	-28.93%	22.09%	23.01%

Correlation

The correlation between FBGX and CEFD 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	0.32
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.55
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 3, 2020	0.56

The correlation between FBGX and CEFD shifts across timeframes, from 0.32 (3 years) to 0.56 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

FBGX vs. CEFD — Risk / Return Rank

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

FBGX

Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.

CEFD

CEFD Risk / Return Rank: 36
CEFD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 37
CEFD Sortino Ratio Rank: 36
CEFD Omega Ratio Rank: 39
CEFD Calmar Ratio Rank: 28
CEFD Martin Ratio Rank: 40

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.

FBGX vs. CEFD - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

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

	FBGX	CEFD	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	—	1.25	—
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	—	1.78	—
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	—	1.25	—
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	—	1.33	—
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	—	6.09	—

Drawdowns

Drawdown Indicators

	FBGX	CEFD	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	—	-1.80%	—
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	—	-11.63%	—
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	—	2.72%	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	FBGX	CEFD	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	—	4.13%	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	—	11.71%	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	—	13.28%	—
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	—	17.99%	—
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	—	17.30%	—

FBGX vs. CEFD - Expense Ratio Comparison

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

Dividends

FBGX vs. CEFD - Dividend Comparison

FBGX has not paid dividends to shareholders, while CEFD's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 14.84%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
CEFD ETRACS Monthly Pay 1.5x Leveraged Closed-End Fund Index ETN	14.84%	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 FBGX and CEFD in my portfolio?

FBGX and CEFD 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, FBGX or CEFD?

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, FBGX or CEFD?

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

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

CEFD has the higher dividend yield at 14.84%, compared with 0.00% for FBGX.

What is the main difference between FBGX and CEFD?

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