FBGX vs. CRMG
FBGX (UBS AG FI Enhanced Large Cap Growth ETN) and CRMG (Leverage Shares 2X Long CRM Daily ETF) are both Leveraged Equities funds. FBGX is passively managed, while CRMG is actively managed. FBGX charges 1.29%/yr vs 0.75%/yr for CRMG.
Performance
FBGX vs. CRMG - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
FBGX
- 1D
- —
- 1M
- —
- YTD
- —
- 6M
- —
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
CRMG
- 1D
- 4.23%
- 1M
- -29.64%
- YTD
- -71.26%
- 6M
- -71.01%
- 1Y
- -73.99%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
FBGX vs. CRMG - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
FBGX UBS AG FI Enhanced Large Cap Growth ETN | 0.00% | 0.00% |
CRMG Leverage Shares 2X Long CRM Daily ETF | -71.26% | -0.29% |
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
Return for Risk
FBGX vs. CRMG — Risk / Return Rank
FBGX
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
CRMG
FBGX vs. CRMG - 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 Leverage Shares 2X Long CRM Daily ETF (CRMG). 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 | CRMG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | — | 0.79 | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | — | -0.97 | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | — | -1.70 | — |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
FBGX vs. CRMG - Drawdown Comparison
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| FBGX | CRMG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | — | -79.83% | — |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | — | -76.80% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | — | -78.97% | — |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | — | -39.18% | — |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | — | 43.41% | — |
Volatility
FBGX vs. CRMG - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| FBGX | CRMG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | — | 32.53% | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | — | 63.74% | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | — | 76.12% | — |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | — | 75.39% | — |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | — | 75.39% | — |
FBGX vs. CRMG - Expense Ratio Comparison
FBGX has a 1.29% expense ratio, which is higher than CRMG's 0.75% expense ratio.
Dividends
FBGX vs. CRMG - Dividend Comparison
Neither FBGX nor CRMG has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
On fees, CRMG is cheaper at 0.75% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
CRMG is cheaper with a 0.75% expense ratio, compared with 1.29% for FBGX.
FBGX and CRMG have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.
They also come from different issuers: UBS and Leverage Shares. Their fees differ too: 1.29% for FBGX and 0.75% for CRMG.
Find the right allocation for FBGX and CRMG
Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.
Open Portfolio Optimizer