FNGO vs. FUTG
FNGO (MicroSectors FANG+ Index 2X Leveraged ETN) and FUTG (Leverage Shares 2X Long FUTU Daily ETF) are both Leveraged Equities funds. FNGO is passively managed, while FUTG is actively managed. A 0.57 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. FNGO charges 0.95%/yr vs 0.75%/yr for FUTG.
Performance
FNGO vs. FUTG - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, FNGO achieves a 29.63% return, which is significantly higher than FUTG's -75.53% return.
FNGO
- 1D
- -2.35%
- 1M
- 23.13%
- YTD
- 29.63%
- 6M
- 17.47%
- 1Y
- 54.81%
- 3Y*
- 62.64%
- 5Y*
- 30.44%
- 10Y*
- —
FUTG
- 1D
- -11.10%
- 1M
- -70.24%
- YTD
- -75.53%
- 6M
- -77.00%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
FNGO vs. FUTG - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
FNGO MicroSectors FANG+ Index 2X Leveraged ETN | 29.63% | -5.01% |
FUTG Leverage Shares 2X Long FUTU Daily ETF | -75.53% | -0.80% |
Correlation
The correlation between FNGO and FUTG is 0.57, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 15, 2025 | 0.57 |
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
FNGO vs. FUTG — Risk / Return Rank
FNGO
FUTG
FNGO vs. FUTG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for MicroSectors FANG+ Index 2X Leveraged ETN (FNGO) and Leverage Shares 2X Long FUTU Daily ETF (FUTG). 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.
| FNGO | FUTG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.24 | — | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.29 | — | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 3.39 | — | — |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| FNGO | FUTG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.39 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.51 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.67 | -0.66 | +1.33 |
Drawdowns
FNGO vs. FUTG - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum FNGO drawdown since its inception was -78.39%, smaller than the maximum FUTG drawdown of -86.19%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FNGO and FUTG.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| FNGO | FUTG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -78.39% | -86.19% | +7.80% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -42.73% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -47.64% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -78.39% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -2.94% | -84.29% | +81.35% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -23.91% | -40.35% | +16.44% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 16.21% | — | — |
Volatility
FNGO vs. FUTG - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| FNGO | FUTG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 11.29% | — | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 30.58% | — | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 39.56% | 136.01% | -96.45% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 60.24% | 136.01% | -75.77% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 61.54% | 136.01% | -74.47% |
FNGO vs. FUTG - Expense Ratio Comparison
FNGO has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is higher than FUTG's 0.75% expense ratio.
Dividends
FNGO vs. FUTG - Dividend Comparison
Neither FNGO nor FUTG has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
FNGO and FUTG have a correlation of 0.57, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, FUTG is cheaper at 0.75% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
FUTG is cheaper with a 0.75% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for FNGO.
FNGO and FUTG have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.
They also come from different issuers: Bank of Montreal and Leverage Shares. Their fees differ too: 0.95% for FNGO and 0.75% for FUTG.
Find the right allocation for FNGO and FUTG
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