FCG vs. POW
FCG (First Trust Natural Gas ETF) and POW (VistaShares Electrification Supercycle ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - FCG is a Energy Equities fund tracking the ISE-Revere Natural Gas Index, while POW is a Actively Managed fund actively managed by VistaShares. FCG is passively managed, while POW is actively managed. At a correlation of -0.15, they often move in opposite directions. FCG charges 0.60%/yr vs 0.75%/yr for POW.
Performance
FCG vs. POW - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, FCG achieves a 18.86% return, which is significantly lower than POW's 41.57% return.
FCG
- 1D
- -0.18%
- 1M
- -3.79%
- 6M
- 17.60%
- YTD
- 18.86%
- 1Y
- 18.31%
- 3Y*
- 8.33%
- 5Y*
- 16.79%
- 10Y*
- 3.68%
POW
- 1D
- 1.90%
- 1M
- -7.03%
- 6M
- 34.18%
- YTD
- 41.57%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
FCG vs. POW - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
FCG First Trust Natural Gas ETF | 18.86% | 4.53% |
POW VistaShares Electrification Supercycle ETF | 41.57% | -1.70% |
Correlation
The correlation between FCG and POW is -0.15, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 28, 2025 | -0.15 |
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
FCG vs. POW — Risk / Return Rank
FCG
POW
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
FCG vs. POW - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for First Trust Natural Gas ETF (FCG) and VistaShares Electrification Supercycle ETF (POW). 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.
| FCG | POW | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.13 | — | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.93 | — | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 2.48 | — | — |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
FCG vs. POW - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum FCG drawdown since its inception was -97.20%, which is greater than POW's maximum drawdown of -18.37%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FCG and POW.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| FCG | POW | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -97.20% | -18.37% | -78.83% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -19.67% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -29.44% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -33.33% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -85.04% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -76.04% | -16.82% | -59.22% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -65.42% | -4.40% | -61.02% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 7.41% | — | — |
Volatility
FCG vs. POW - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| FCG | POW | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 7.94% | — | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 20.61% | — | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 27.24% | 32.91% | -5.67% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 33.26% | 32.91% | +0.35% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 38.24% | 32.91% | +5.33% |
FCG vs. POW - Expense Ratio Comparison
FCG has a 0.60% expense ratio, which is lower than POW's 0.75% expense ratio.
Dividends
FCG vs. POW - Dividend Comparison
FCG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.31%, more than POW's 0.14% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FCG First Trust Natural Gas ETF | 2.31% | 2.86% | 2.76% | 3.25% | 3.04% | 1.73% | 3.82% | 2.87% | 1.46% | 1.56% | 1.70% | 4.79% |
POW VistaShares Electrification Supercycle ETF | 0.14% | 0.19% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
FCG and POW have a correlation of -0.15, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, FCG is cheaper at 0.60% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
FCG is cheaper with a 0.60% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for POW.
FCG has the higher dividend yield at 2.31%, compared with 0.14% for POW.
FCG is categorized as Energy Equities, while POW is Actively Managed. They also come from different issuers: First Trust and VistaShares. Their fees differ too: 0.60% for FCG and 0.75% for POW.
Find the right allocation for FCG and POW
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