FBGX vs. MSEQX

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

FBGX (UBS AG FI Enhanced Large Cap Growth ETN) and MSEQX (Morgan Stanley Growth Portfolio Class I) are both funds - FBGX is a Leveraged Equities fund tracking the Russell 1000 Growth Index (200%), while MSEQX is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund managed by Morgan Stanley. A 0.69 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. FBGX charges 1.29%/yr vs 0.56%/yr for MSEQX.

Performance

FBGX vs. MSEQX - 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 Morgan Stanley Growth Portfolio Class I (MSEQX). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

FBGX

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

MSEQX

• 1D: -1.83%
• 1M: -1.95%
• YTD: -7.94%
• 6M: -11.72%
• 1Y: -0.33%
• 3Y*: 25.19%
• 5Y*: -1.95%
• 10Y*: 16.87%

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

FBGX vs. MSEQX - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
FBGX UBS AG FI Enhanced Large Cap Growth ETN	0.00%	0.00%	35.73%	83.74%	-56.41%	57.04%	65.79%	75.84%	-16.58%	64.01%
MSEQX Morgan Stanley Growth Portfolio Class I	-7.94%	24.78%	46.65%	50.36%	-60.18%	-0.00%	115.60%	38.25%	5.38%	43.91%

Correlation

The correlation between FBGX and MSEQX is 0.69, 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	0.35
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.58
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.66
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 11, 2014	0.69

The correlation between FBGX and MSEQX shifts across timeframes, from 0.35 (3 years) to 0.69 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

FBGX vs. MSEQX — 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.

MSEQX

MSEQX Risk / Return Rank: 3
MSEQX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3
MSEQX Sortino Ratio Rank: 4
MSEQX Omega Ratio Rank: 3
MSEQX Calmar Ratio Rank: 3
MSEQX Martin Ratio Rank: 3

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. MSEQX - 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 Morgan Stanley Growth Portfolio Class I (MSEQX). 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	MSEQX	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	—	0.06	—
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	—	0.29	—
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	—	1.03	—
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	—	0.06	—
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	—	0.13	—

Drawdowns

Drawdown Indicators

	FBGX	MSEQX	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	—	-69.48%	—
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	—	-27.73%	—
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-32.52%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-69.48%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-69.48%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	—	-19.52%	—
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	—	-16.90%	—
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	—	13.38%	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	FBGX	MSEQX	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	—	10.33%	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	—	22.48%	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	—	29.30%	—
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	—	39.86%	—
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	—	33.88%	—

FBGX vs. MSEQX - Expense Ratio Comparison

FBGX has a 1.29% expense ratio, which is higher than MSEQX's 0.56% expense ratio.

Dividends

FBGX vs. MSEQX - Dividend Comparison

Neither FBGX nor MSEQX has paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
FBGX UBS AG FI Enhanced Large Cap Growth 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%
MSEQX Morgan Stanley Growth Portfolio Class I	0.00%	0.00%	0.55%	0.05%	16.79%	24.24%	9.36%	21.39%	5.38%	21.18%	12.71%	7.55%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FBGX and MSEQX in my portfolio?

FBGX and MSEQX have a correlation of 0.69, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.