FNGD vs. QTJL

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

FNGD (MicroSectors FANG+™ Index -3X Inverse Leveraged ETN) and QTJL (Innovator Growth Accelerated Plus ETF - July) are both Leveraged Equities funds. FNGD is passively managed, while QTJL is actively managed. Over the past 3 years, FNGD returned -65.49%/yr vs 19.09%/yr for QTJL. At a correlation of -0.86, they often move in opposite directions. FNGD charges 0.95%/yr vs 0.79%/yr for QTJL.

Performance

FNGD vs. QTJL - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in MicroSectors FANG+™ Index -3X Inverse Leveraged ETN (FNGD) and Innovator Growth Accelerated Plus ETF - July (QTJL). 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 lower than QTJL's 7.38% return.

FNGD

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

QTJL

• 1D: -0.04%
• 1M: 0.44%
• YTD: 7.38%
• 6M: 6.82%
• 1Y: 18.59%
• 3Y*: 19.09%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

FNGD vs. QTJL - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
FNGD MicroSectors FANG+™ Index -3X Inverse Leveraged ETN	-27.13%	-61.42%	-76.57%	-90.14%	52.21%	-20.41%
QTJL Innovator Growth Accelerated Plus ETF - July	7.38%	21.07%	16.50%	42.39%	-30.16%	9.36%

Correlation

The correlation between FNGD and QTJL is -0.77, 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	-0.77
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	-0.83
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 1, 2021	-0.86

The correlation between FNGD and QTJL has been stable across timeframes, ranging from -0.86 to -0.77 - a consistent structural relationship.

FNGD vs. QTJL - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	FNGD	QTJL
Technology	63.4%	58.0%
Communication Services	26.0%	14.5%
Consumer Cyclical	10.6%	11.6%
Financial Services	10.0%	0.2%
Basic Materials	-	1.0%
Consumer Defensive	-	6.6%
Energy	-	0.5%
Healthcare	-	3.7%
Industrials	-	2.6%
Real Estate	-	0.1%
Utilities	-	1.2%

Return for Risk

FNGD vs. QTJL — 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

QTJL

QTJL Risk / Return Rank: 67
QTJL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 61
QTJL Sortino Ratio Rank: 63
QTJL Omega Ratio Rank: 71
QTJL Calmar Ratio Rank: 61
QTJL Martin Ratio Rank: 80

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. QTJL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for MicroSectors FANG+™ Index -3X Inverse Leveraged ETN (FNGD) and Innovator Growth Accelerated Plus ETF - July (QTJL). 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	QTJL	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.76	1.89	-2.65
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-1.00	2.70	-3.70
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.89	1.39	-0.50
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.75	2.79	-3.55
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-1.52	14.72	-16.24

FNGD vs. QTJL - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FNGD Sharpe Ratio is -0.76, which is lower than the QTJL Sharpe Ratio of 1.89. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FNGD and QTJL, 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. QTJL - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FNGD drawdown since its inception was -100.00%, which is greater than QTJL's maximum drawdown of -33.40%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FNGD and QTJL.

Drawdown Indicators

	FNGD	QTJL	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-100.00%	-33.40%	-66.60%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-65.92%	-6.68%	-59.24%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-97.35%	-22.43%	-74.92%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-99.67%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-100.00%	-0.04%	-99.96%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-87.30%	-7.85%	-79.45%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	34.15%	1.27%	+32.88%

Volatility

FNGD vs. QTJL - Volatility Comparison

MicroSectors FANG+™ Index -3X Inverse Leveraged ETN (FNGD) has a higher volatility of 33.07% compared to Innovator Growth Accelerated Plus ETF - July (QTJL) at 0.60%. This indicates that FNGD's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than QTJL based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FNGD	QTJL	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	33.07%	0.60%	+32.47%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	53.22%	7.42%	+45.80%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	65.50%	9.88%	+55.62%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	89.67%	20.31%	+69.36%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	91.30%	20.31%	+70.99%

FNGD vs. QTJL - Expense Ratio Comparison

FNGD has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is higher than QTJL's 0.79% expense ratio.

Dividends

FNGD vs. QTJL - Dividend Comparison

Neither FNGD nor QTJL has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FNGD and QTJL in my portfolio?

FNGD and QTJL have a correlation of -0.77, 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 QTJL?

FNGD has higher volatility (33.07%) compared to QTJL (0.60%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FNGD dropped -100.00% vs QTJL's -33.40%.

Which ETF is better, FNGD or QTJL?

On 3-year performance, QTJL leads with 19.09% vs -65.49% for FNGD. On fees, QTJL is cheaper at 0.79% per year. On volatility, QTJL has been the lower-risk option at 0.60%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FNGD or QTJL?

Over the 3-year period, QTJL has performed better with a 19.09% return vs -65.49%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FNGD or QTJL?

QTJL is cheaper with a 0.79% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for FNGD.

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

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

What is the main difference between FNGD and QTJL?

They also come from different issuers: BMO and Innovator. Their fees differ too: 0.95% for FNGD and 0.79% for QTJL.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

QTJL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.89 vs -0.76), 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.