FCG vs. PWRZ
FCG (First Trust Natural Gas ETF) and PWRZ (TrueShares Eagle Global Next Gen Power Infrastructure ETF) are both Energy Equities funds. FCG is passively managed, while PWRZ is actively managed. At a 0.10 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. FCG charges 0.60%/yr vs 0.75%/yr for PWRZ.
Performance
FCG vs. PWRZ - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
FCG
- 1D
- 0.33%
- 1M
- 0.72%
- 6M
- 17.67%
- YTD
- 18.73%
- 1Y
- 22.60%
- 3Y*
- 8.23%
- 5Y*
- 17.73%
- 10Y*
- 3.65%
PWRZ
- 1D
- -0.93%
- 1M
- —
- 6M
- —
- YTD
- —
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
FCG vs. PWRZ - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | |
|---|---|
FCG First Trust Natural Gas ETF | 2.08% |
PWRZ TrueShares Eagle Global Next Gen Power Infrastructure ETF | -0.37% |
Correlation
The correlation between FCG and PWRZ is 0.10, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 10, 2026 | 0.10 |
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. PWRZ — Risk / Return Rank
FCG
PWRZ
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
FCG vs. PWRZ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for First Trust Natural Gas ETF (FCG) and TrueShares Eagle Global Next Gen Power Infrastructure ETF (PWRZ). 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 | PWRZ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.15 | — | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.15 | — | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 3.01 | — | — |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
FCG vs. PWRZ - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum FCG drawdown since its inception was -97.20%, which is greater than PWRZ's maximum drawdown of -1.21%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FCG and PWRZ.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| FCG | PWRZ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -97.20% | -1.21% | -95.99% |
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 | -76.06% | -1.21% | -74.85% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -65.43% | -0.42% | -65.01% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 7.53% | — | — |
Volatility
FCG vs. PWRZ - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| FCG | PWRZ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 6.71% | — | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 20.54% | — | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 27.10% | 12.75% | +14.35% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 33.19% | 12.75% | +20.44% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 38.23% | 12.75% | +25.48% |
FCG vs. PWRZ - Expense Ratio Comparison
FCG has a 0.60% expense ratio, which is lower than PWRZ's 0.75% expense ratio.
Dividends
FCG vs. PWRZ - Dividend Comparison
FCG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.31%, while PWRZ has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| 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% |
PWRZ TrueShares Eagle Global Next Gen Power Infrastructure ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% | 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 PWRZ have a correlation of 0.10, 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 PWRZ.
FCG has the higher dividend yield at 2.31%, compared with 0.00% for PWRZ.
They also come from different issuers: First Trust and TrueShares. Their fees differ too: 0.60% for FCG and 0.75% for PWRZ.
Find the right allocation for FCG and PWRZ
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