FNGD vs. NRGD

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

FNGD (MicroSectors FANG+™ Index -3X Inverse Leveraged ETN) and NRGD (MicroSectors U.S. Big Oil Index -3X Inverse Leveraged ETN) are both Leveraged Equities funds from BMO - FNGD tracks the NYSE FANG+ Index (-300%) while NRGD tracks the Solactive MicroSectors U.S. Big Oil Index (-300%). Both are passively managed. Over the past year, FNGD returned -49.41% vs -72.26% for NRGD. At a correlation of -0.04, they often move in opposite directions. Both charge a 0.95% expense ratio.

Performance

FNGD vs. NRGD - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in MicroSectors FANG+™ Index -3X Inverse Leveraged ETN (FNGD) and MicroSectors U.S. Big Oil Index -3X Inverse Leveraged ETN (NRGD). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FNGD achieves a -27.13% return, which is significantly higher than NRGD's -63.27% return.

FNGD

• 1D: 7.44%
• 1M: 2.40%
• YTD: -27.13%
• 6M: -23.35%
• 1Y: -49.41%
• 3Y*: -65.49%
• 5Y*: -62.47%
• 10Y*: —

NRGD

• 1D: -2.47%
• 1M: 16.95%
• YTD: -63.27%
• 6M: -63.90%
• 1Y: -72.26%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

FNGD vs. NRGD - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
FNGD MicroSectors FANG+™ Index -3X Inverse Leveraged ETN	-27.13%	-52.69%
NRGD MicroSectors U.S. Big Oil Index -3X Inverse Leveraged ETN	-63.27%	-35.40%

Correlation

The correlation between FNGD and NRGD is -0.20, 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 (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.20
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 20, 2025	-0.04

The correlation between FNGD and NRGD shifts across timeframes, from -0.20 (1 year) to -0.04 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

FNGD vs. NRGD - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	FNGD	NRGD
Technology	63.4%	-
Communication Services	26.0%	-
Consumer Cyclical	10.6%	-
Financial Services	10.0%	-
Basic Materials	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Energy	-	100.0%
Healthcare	-	-
Industrials	-	-
Real Estate	-	-
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

FNGD vs. NRGD — Risk / Return Rank

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

FNGD

FNGD Risk / Return Rank: 3
FNGD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3
FNGD Sortino Ratio Rank: 3
FNGD Omega Ratio Rank: 3
FNGD Calmar Ratio Rank: 3
FNGD Martin Ratio Rank: 1

NRGD

NRGD Risk / Return Rank: 1
NRGD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1
NRGD Sortino Ratio Rank: 1
NRGD Omega Ratio Rank: 1
NRGD Calmar Ratio Rank: 1
NRGD Martin Ratio Rank: 1

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.

FNGD vs. NRGD - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for MicroSectors FANG+™ Index -3X Inverse Leveraged ETN (FNGD) and MicroSectors U.S. Big Oil Index -3X Inverse Leveraged ETN (NRGD). 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.

	FNGD	NRGD	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.76	-0.97	+0.21
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-1.00	-1.82	+0.82
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.89	0.81	+0.08
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.75	-0.90	+0.15
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-1.52	-1.45	-0.07

FNGD vs. NRGD - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FNGD Sharpe Ratio is -0.76, which is comparable to the NRGD Sharpe Ratio of -0.97. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FNGD and NRGD, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

FNGD vs. NRGD - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FNGD drawdown since its inception was -100.00%, which is greater than NRGD's maximum drawdown of -89.64%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FNGD and NRGD.

Drawdown Indicators

	FNGD	NRGD	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-100.00%	-89.64%	-10.36%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-65.92%	-80.03%	+14.11%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-97.35%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-99.67%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-100.00%	-86.51%	-13.49%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-87.30%	-59.82%	-27.48%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	34.15%	49.93%	-15.78%

Volatility

FNGD vs. NRGD - Volatility Comparison

MicroSectors FANG+™ Index -3X Inverse Leveraged ETN (FNGD) has a higher volatility of 33.07% compared to MicroSectors U.S. Big Oil Index -3X Inverse Leveraged ETN (NRGD) at 24.74%. This indicates that FNGD's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than NRGD based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FNGD	NRGD	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	33.07%	24.74%	+8.33%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	53.22%	59.20%	-5.98%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	65.50%	75.34%	-9.84%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	89.67%	88.73%	+0.94%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	91.30%	88.73%	+2.57%

FNGD vs. NRGD - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both FNGD and NRGD have an expense ratio of 0.95%.

Dividends

FNGD vs. NRGD - Dividend Comparison

Neither FNGD nor NRGD has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FNGD and NRGD in my portfolio?

FNGD and NRGD have a correlation of -0.20, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, FNGD or NRGD?

FNGD has higher volatility (33.07%) compared to NRGD (24.74%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FNGD dropped -100.00% vs NRGD's -89.64%.

Which ETF is better, FNGD or NRGD?

On 1-year performance, FNGD leads with -49.41% vs -72.26% for NRGD. Both ETFs have the same 0.95% expense ratio. On volatility, NRGD has been the lower-risk option at 24.74%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FNGD or NRGD?

Over the 1-year period, FNGD has performed better with a -49.41% return vs -72.26%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FNGD or NRGD?

FNGD and NRGD have the same expense ratio: 0.95% per year.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, FNGD or NRGD?

FNGD and NRGD have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

What is the main difference between FNGD and NRGD?

FNGD tracks NYSE FANG+ Index (-300%), while NRGD tracks Solactive MicroSectors U.S. Big Oil Index (-300%).

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FNGD currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (-0.76 vs -0.97), 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.