FNGG vs. TQQQ

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

FNGG (Direxion Daily NYSE FANG+ Bull 2X Shares) and TQQQ (ProShares UltraPro QQQ) are both Leveraged Equities funds - FNGG tracks the NYSE FANG+ Index (2x Leveraged) while TQQQ tracks the NASDAQ-100 Index (300%). Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, FNGG returned 48.04%/yr vs 58.02%/yr for TQQQ. Their correlation of 0.91 suggests significant overlap in exposure. FNGG charges 0.97%/yr vs 0.95%/yr for TQQQ.

Performance

FNGG vs. TQQQ - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Direxion Daily NYSE FANG+ Bull 2X Shares (FNGG) and ProShares UltraPro QQQ (TQQQ). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FNGG achieves a 5.64% return, which is significantly lower than TQQQ's 41.43% return.

FNGG

• 1D: -4.89%
• 1M: -7.16%
• YTD: 5.64%
• 6M: 2.41%
• 1Y: 24.87%
• 3Y*: 48.04%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

TQQQ

• 1D: -9.86%
• 1M: -4.37%
• YTD: 41.43%
• 6M: 35.75%
• 1Y: 100.69%
• 3Y*: 58.02%
• 5Y*: 21.47%
• 10Y*: 45.48%

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

FNGG vs. TQQQ - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
FNGG Direxion Daily NYSE FANG+ Bull 2X Shares	5.64%	27.21%	98.76%	204.23%	-87.15%	-4.05%
TQQQ ProShares UltraPro QQQ	41.43%	34.35%	58.27%	198.04%	-79.09%	32.02%

Correlation

The correlation between FNGG and TQQQ is 0.88, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.88
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.91
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 30, 2021	0.91

The correlation between FNGG and TQQQ has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.88 to 0.91 - a consistent structural relationship.

FNGG vs. TQQQ - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	FNGG	TQQQ
Technology	64.5%	53.8%
Communication Services	25.2%	15.8%
Consumer Cyclical	10.3%	12.3%
Basic Materials	-	1.1%
Consumer Defensive	-	7.7%
Energy	-	0.6%
Financial Services	-	0.2%
Healthcare	-	4.2%
Industrials	-	2.8%
Real Estate	-	0.1%
Utilities	-	1.4%

Return for Risk

FNGG vs. TQQQ — Risk / Return Rank

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

FNGG

FNGG Risk / Return Rank: 18
FNGG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 18
FNGG Sortino Ratio Rank: 19
FNGG Omega Ratio Rank: 19
FNGG Calmar Ratio Rank: 15
FNGG Martin Ratio Rank: 16

TQQQ

TQQQ Risk / Return Rank: 53
TQQQ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 58
TQQQ Sortino Ratio Rank: 47
TQQQ Omega Ratio Rank: 49
TQQQ Calmar Ratio Rank: 57
TQQQ Martin Ratio Rank: 52

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.

FNGG vs. TQQQ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Direxion Daily NYSE FANG+ Bull 2X Shares (FNGG) and ProShares UltraPro QQQ (TQQQ). 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.

	FNGG	TQQQ	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.57	1.90	-1.33
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.04	2.27	-1.23
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.13	1.30	-0.18
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.58	2.74	-2.16
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	1.50	8.72	-7.22

FNGG vs. TQQQ - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FNGG Sharpe Ratio is 0.57, which is lower than the TQQQ Sharpe Ratio of 1.90. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FNGG and TQQQ, 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

FNGG vs. TQQQ - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FNGG drawdown since its inception was -91.33%, which is greater than TQQQ's maximum drawdown of -81.66%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FNGG and TQQQ.

Drawdown Indicators

	FNGG	TQQQ	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-91.33%	-81.66%	-9.67%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-43.01%	-36.97%	-6.04%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-47.03%	-58.04%	+11.01%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-81.66%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-81.66%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-21.87%	-14.65%	-7.22%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-55.56%	-18.49%	-37.07%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	16.65%	11.59%	+5.06%

Volatility

FNGG vs. TQQQ - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Direxion Daily NYSE FANG+ Bull 2X Shares (FNGG) is 21.11%, while ProShares UltraPro QQQ (TQQQ) has a volatility of 27.27%. This indicates that FNGG experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than TQQQ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FNGG	TQQQ	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	21.11%	27.27%	-6.16%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	35.05%	43.35%	-8.30%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	43.67%	53.39%	-9.72%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	67.80%	67.41%	+0.39%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	67.80%	66.32%	+1.48%

FNGG vs. TQQQ - Expense Ratio Comparison

FNGG has a 0.97% expense ratio, which is higher than TQQQ's 0.95% expense ratio.

Dividends

FNGG vs. TQQQ - Dividend Comparison

FNGG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 11.22%, more than TQQQ's 0.42% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
FNGG Direxion Daily NYSE FANG+ Bull 2X Shares	11.22%	11.89%	0.79%	0.88%	0.00%	4.99%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
TQQQ ProShares UltraPro QQQ	0.42%	0.65%	1.27%	1.26%	0.57%	0.00%	0.00%	0.06%	0.11%	0.00%	0.00%	0.01%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FNGG and TQQQ in my portfolio?

FNGG and TQQQ have a correlation of 0.88, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, FNGG or TQQQ?

TQQQ has higher volatility (27.27%) compared to FNGG (21.11%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FNGG dropped -91.33% vs TQQQ's -81.66%.

Which ETF is better, FNGG or TQQQ?

On 3-year performance, TQQQ leads with 58.02% vs 48.04% for FNGG. On fees, TQQQ is cheaper at 0.95% per year. On volatility, FNGG has been the lower-risk option at 21.11%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FNGG or TQQQ?

Over the 3-year period, TQQQ has performed better with a 58.02% return vs 48.04%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FNGG or TQQQ?

TQQQ is cheaper with a 0.95% expense ratio, compared with 0.97% for FNGG.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, FNGG or TQQQ?

FNGG has the higher dividend yield at 11.22%, compared with 0.42% for TQQQ.

What is the main difference between FNGG and TQQQ?

FNGG tracks NYSE FANG+ Index (2x Leveraged), while TQQQ tracks NASDAQ-100 Index (300%). They also come from different issuers: Direxion and ProShares. Their fees differ too: 0.97% for FNGG and 0.95% for TQQQ.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

TQQQ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.90 vs 0.57), 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.