FNGO vs. IWY
FNGO (MicroSectors FANG+ Index 2X Leveraged ETN) and IWY (iShares Russell Top 200 Growth ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - FNGO is a Leveraged Equities fund tracking the NYSE FANG+ Index (+200%), while IWY is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund tracking the Russell Top 200 Growth Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, FNGO returned 25.62%/yr vs 15.15%/yr for IWY. Their correlation of 0.86 suggests significant overlap in exposure. FNGO charges 0.95%/yr vs 0.20%/yr for IWY.
Performance
FNGO vs. IWY - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, FNGO achieves a 8.91% return, which is significantly higher than IWY's 2.99% return.
FNGO
- 1D
- -1.60%
- 1M
- -7.03%
- YTD
- 8.91%
- 6M
- 3.86%
- 1Y
- 26.54%
- 3Y*
- 49.78%
- 5Y*
- 25.62%
- 10Y*
- —
IWY
- 1D
- -0.00%
- 1M
- -2.39%
- YTD
- 2.99%
- 6M
- 3.75%
- 1Y
- 19.83%
- 3Y*
- 23.03%
- 5Y*
- 15.15%
- 10Y*
- 19.24%
FNGO vs. IWY - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FNGO MicroSectors FANG+ Index 2X Leveraged ETN | 8.91% | 25.49% | 101.65% | 240.10% | -71.55% | 28.38% | 238.00% | 79.61% | -39.85% |
IWY iShares Russell Top 200 Growth ETF | 2.99% | 18.19% | 34.89% | 46.49% | -29.91% | 31.05% | 39.01% | 36.20% | -10.72% |
Correlation
The correlation between FNGO and IWY is 0.89, 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 | 0.89 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.91 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.90 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 2, 2018 | 0.86 |
The correlation between FNGO and IWY has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.86 to 0.91 - a consistent structural relationship.
FNGO vs. IWY - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
FNGO
IWY
Technology
Communication Services
Consumer Cyclical
Financial Services
Basic Materials
-
Consumer Defensive
-
Energy
-
Healthcare
-
Industrials
-
Real Estate
-
Utilities
-
Technology
FNGO
IWY
Communication Services
FNGO
IWY
Consumer Cyclical
FNGO
IWY
Financial Services
FNGO
IWY
Basic Materials
FNGO
-
IWY
Consumer Defensive
FNGO
-
IWY
Energy
FNGO
-
IWY
Healthcare
FNGO
-
IWY
Industrials
FNGO
-
IWY
Real Estate
FNGO
-
IWY
Utilities
FNGO
-
IWY
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. IWY — Risk / Return Rank
FNGO
IWY
FNGO vs. IWY - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for MicroSectors FANG+ Index 2X Leveraged ETN (FNGO) and iShares Russell Top 200 Growth ETF (IWY). 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.
| FNGO | IWY | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.61 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.63 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.13 | 1.22 | -0.09 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.62 | 1.20 | -0.57 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 1.62 | 3.85 | -2.23 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
FNGO vs. IWY - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum FNGO drawdown since its inception was -78.39%, which is greater than IWY's maximum drawdown of -32.68%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FNGO and IWY.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| FNGO | IWY | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -78.39% | -32.68% | -45.71% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -42.73% | -16.63% | -26.10% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -47.64% | -23.22% | -24.42% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -78.39% | -32.68% | -45.71% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -32.68% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -18.46% | -5.68% | -12.78% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -23.87% | -4.75% | -19.12% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 16.45% | 5.16% | +11.29% |
Volatility
FNGO vs. IWY - Volatility Comparison
MicroSectors FANG+ Index 2X Leveraged ETN (FNGO) has a higher volatility of 17.58% compared to iShares Russell Top 200 Growth ETF (IWY) at 5.30%. This indicates that FNGO's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than IWY based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| FNGO | IWY | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 17.58% | 5.30% | +12.28% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 33.63% | 12.38% | +21.25% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 41.88% | 16.01% | +25.87% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 60.50% | 21.54% | +38.96% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 61.61% | 21.01% | +40.60% |
FNGO vs. IWY - Expense Ratio Comparison
FNGO has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is higher than IWY's 0.20% expense ratio.
Dividends
FNGO vs. IWY - Dividend Comparison
FNGO has not paid dividends to shareholders, while IWY's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.34%.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FNGO MicroSectors FANG+ Index 2X Leveraged ETN | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
IWY iShares Russell Top 200 Growth ETF | 0.34% | 0.36% | 0.42% | 0.68% | 0.88% | 0.50% | 0.71% | 1.06% | 1.32% | 1.26% | 1.51% | 1.58% |
Frequently Asked Questions
FNGO and IWY have a correlation of 0.89, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
FNGO has higher volatility (17.58%) compared to IWY (5.30%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FNGO dropped -78.39% vs IWY's -32.68%.
On 5-year performance, FNGO leads with 25.62% vs 15.15% for IWY. On fees, IWY is cheaper at 0.20% per year. On volatility, IWY has been the lower-risk option at 5.30%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 5-year period, FNGO has performed better with a 25.62% return vs 15.15%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
IWY is cheaper with a 0.20% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for FNGO.
IWY has the higher dividend yield at 0.34%, compared with 0.00% for FNGO.
FNGO is categorized as Leveraged Equities, while IWY is Large Cap Growth Equities. FNGO tracks NYSE FANG+ Index (+200%), while IWY tracks Russell Top 200 Growth Index. They also come from different issuers: Bank of Montreal and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.95% for FNGO and 0.20% for IWY.
IWY currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.24 vs 0.64), 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.
Find the right allocation for FNGO and IWY
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