FCG vs. CIBR

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

FCG (First Trust Natural Gas ETF) and CIBR (First Trust NASDAQ Cybersecurity ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - FCG is a Energy Equities fund tracking the ISE-Revere Natural Gas Index, while CIBR is a Technology Equities fund tracking the Nasdaq CTA Cybersecurity Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, FCG returned 4.65%/yr vs 18.49%/yr for CIBR. At a 0.30 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. Both charge a 0.60% expense ratio.

Performance

FCG vs. CIBR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in First Trust Natural Gas ETF (FCG) and First Trust NASDAQ Cybersecurity ETF (CIBR). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both investments are quite close, with FCG having a 27.71% return and CIBR slightly higher at 28.52%. Over the past 10 years, FCG has underperformed CIBR with an annualized return of 4.65%, while CIBR has yielded a comparatively higher 18.49% annualized return.

FCG

• 1D: 1.02%
• 1M: -6.03%
• YTD: 27.71%
• 6M: 20.12%
• 1Y: 32.99%
• 3Y*: 12.75%
• 5Y*: 16.52%
• 10Y*: 4.65%

CIBR

• 1D: -2.81%
• 1M: 31.43%
• YTD: 28.52%
• 6M: 24.03%
• 1Y: 25.78%
• 3Y*: 28.32%
• 5Y*: 16.28%
• 10Y*: 18.49%

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

FCG vs. CIBR - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
FCG First Trust Natural Gas ETF	27.71%	-2.28%	4.16%	2.55%	47.24%	98.49%	-23.20%	-15.76%	-34.81%	-11.38%
CIBR First Trust NASDAQ Cybersecurity ETF	28.52%	13.06%	18.21%	39.71%	-26.46%	19.67%	50.53%	28.52%	1.47%	18.61%

Correlation

The correlation between FCG and CIBR is 0.02, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.02
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.18
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.26
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.28
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 8, 2015	0.30

Over the past year, the correlation between FCG and CIBR has dropped to 0.02 - well below their long-term average of 0.30, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

FCG vs. CIBR - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	FCG	CIBR
Energy	99.2%	-
Technology	0.8%	94.0%
Basic Materials	-	-
Communication Services	-	2.6%
Consumer Cyclical	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Financial Services	-	-
Healthcare	-	-
Industrials	-	3.5%
Real Estate	-	-
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

FCG vs. CIBR — Risk / Return Rank

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

FCG

FCG Risk / Return Rank: 36
FCG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 34
FCG Sortino Ratio Rank: 31
FCG Omega Ratio Rank: 30
FCG Calmar Ratio Rank: 51
FCG Martin Ratio Rank: 36

CIBR

CIBR Risk / Return Rank: 26
CIBR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 29
CIBR Sortino Ratio Rank: 28
CIBR Omega Ratio Rank: 29
CIBR Calmar Ratio Rank: 24
CIBR Martin Ratio Rank: 22

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.

FCG vs. CIBR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for First Trust Natural Gas ETF (FCG) and First Trust NASDAQ Cybersecurity ETF (CIBR). 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.

	FCG	CIBR	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.24	1.06	+0.18
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.69	1.56	+0.13
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.21	1.20	+0.01
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.54	1.18	+1.36
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	5.56	2.79	+2.76
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

FCG vs. CIBR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FCG Sharpe Ratio is 1.24, which is comparable to the CIBR Sharpe Ratio of 1.06. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FCG and CIBR, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	FCG	CIBR	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.24	1.06	+0.18
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.50	0.66	-0.16
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.12	0.79	-0.66
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	-0.11	0.67	-0.78

Drawdowns

FCG vs. CIBR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FCG drawdown since its inception was -97.20%, which is greater than CIBR's maximum drawdown of -33.89%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FCG and CIBR.

Drawdown Indicators

	FCG	CIBR	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-97.20%	-33.89%	-63.31%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-13.07%	-21.99%	+8.92%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-29.44%	-21.99%	-7.45%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-33.33%	-33.89%	+0.56%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-85.04%	-33.89%	-51.15%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-74.25%	-2.81%	-71.44%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-65.38%	-8.66%	-56.72%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	5.95%	9.25%	-3.30%

Volatility

FCG vs. CIBR - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for First Trust Natural Gas ETF (FCG) is 9.60%, while First Trust NASDAQ Cybersecurity ETF (CIBR) has a volatility of 10.90%. This indicates that FCG experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CIBR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FCG	CIBR	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	9.60%	10.90%	-1.30%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	20.15%	20.90%	-0.75%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	26.75%	24.50%	+2.25%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	33.46%	24.95%	+8.51%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	38.30%	23.60%	+14.70%

FCG vs. CIBR - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both FCG and CIBR have an expense ratio of 0.60%.

Dividends

FCG vs. CIBR - Dividend Comparison

FCG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.15%, more than CIBR's 0.45% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
CIBR First Trust NASDAQ Cybersecurity ETF	0.45%	0.42%	0.29%	0.42%	0.31%	0.59%	1.10%	0.23%	0.23%	0.10%	0.77%	0.58%
FCG First Trust Natural Gas ETF	2.15%	2.86%	2.76%	3.25%	3.04%	1.73%	3.82%	2.87%	1.46%	1.56%	1.70%	4.79%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FCG and CIBR in my portfolio?

FCG and CIBR have a correlation of 0.02, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, FCG or CIBR?

CIBR has higher volatility (10.90%) compared to FCG (9.60%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FCG dropped -97.20% vs CIBR's -33.89%.

Which ETF is better, FCG or CIBR?

On 10-year performance, CIBR leads with 18.49% vs 4.65% for FCG. Both ETFs have the same 0.60% expense ratio. On volatility, FCG has been the lower-risk option at 9.60%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FCG or CIBR?

Over the 10-year period, CIBR has performed better with a 18.49% return vs 4.65%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FCG or CIBR?

FCG and CIBR have the same expense ratio: 0.60% per year.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, FCG or CIBR?

FCG has the higher dividend yield at 2.15%, compared with 0.45% for CIBR.

What is the main difference between FCG and CIBR?

FCG is categorized as Energy Equities, while CIBR is Technology Equities. FCG tracks ISE-Revere Natural Gas Index, while CIBR tracks Nasdaq CTA Cybersecurity Index.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FCG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.24 vs 1.06), 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.