FNGS vs. BNKU

Last updated Aug 2, 2026

FNGS (MicroSectors FANG+ ETN) and BNKU (MicroSectors U.S. Big Banks Index 3X Leveraged ETNs) are both exchange-traded funds - FNGS is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund tracking the NYSE FANG+ Index, while BNKU is a Leveraged Equities fund tracking the Solactive MicroSectors U.S. Big Banks Index (-300%). Both are passively managed. Over the past year, FNGS returned 15.45% vs 97.48% for BNKU. Their 0.46 correlation means their historical movements had little consistent relationship. FNGS charges 0.58%/yr vs 0.95%/yr for BNKU.

Performance

FNGS vs. BNKU - Performance Comparison

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FNGS achieves a 9.02% return, which is significantly lower than BNKU's 29.42% return.

FNGS

• 1D: 1.63%
• 1M: 0.59%
• 6M: 12.42%
• YTD: 9.02%
• 1Y: 15.45%
• 3Y*: 28.64%
• 5Y*: 18.98%
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 30.45%

BNKU

• 1D: 1.30%
• 1M: 5.51%
• 6M: 25.35%
• YTD: 29.42%
• 1Y: 97.48%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 47.30%

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
BNKU MicroSectors U.S. Big Banks Index 3X Leveraged ETNs	$317.79K	$636.80K	$487.95K
FNGS MicroSectors FANG+ ETN	$1.57M	$1.92M	$2.40M

FNGS vs. BNKU - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
FNGS MicroSectors FANG+ ETN	9.02%	12.22%
BNKU MicroSectors U.S. Big Banks Index 3X Leveraged ETNs	29.42%	34.97%

Correlation

The correlation between FNGS and BNKU is 0.34, which is low. Their historical price movements had little consistent relationship.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.34
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 20, 2025	0.46

The correlation between FNGS and BNKU shifts across timeframes, from 0.34 (1 year) to 0.46 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

FNGS vs. BNKU - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	FNGS	BNKU
Technology	59.6%	-
Communication Services	30.0%	-
Consumer Cyclical	10.4%	-
Financial Services	10.0%	100.0%
Basic Materials	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Energy	-	-
Healthcare	-	-
Industrials	-	-
Real Estate	-	-
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

FNGS vs. BNKU — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

FNGS

FNGS Risk / Return Rank: 22
FNGS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 23
FNGS Sortino Ratio Rank: 23
FNGS Omega Ratio Rank: 23
FNGS Calmar Ratio Rank: 20
FNGS Martin Ratio Rank: 21

BNKU

BNKU Risk / Return Rank: 55
BNKU Sharpe Ratio Rank: 60
BNKU Sortino Ratio Rank: 54
BNKU Omega Ratio Rank: 55
BNKU Calmar Ratio Rank: 59
BNKU Martin Ratio Rank: 47

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

FNGS vs. BNKU - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for MicroSectors FANG+ ETN (FNGS) and MicroSectors U.S. Big Banks Index 3X Leveraged ETNs (BNKU). 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.

	FNGS	BNKU	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.52	1.41	-0.90
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.86	1.90	-1.04
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.10	1.24	-0.14
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.51	2.05	-1.54
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	1.37	5.41	-4.04

FNGS vs. BNKU - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FNGS Sharpe Ratio is 0.52, which is lower than the BNKU Sharpe Ratio of 1.41. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FNGS and BNKU, 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

FNGS vs. BNKU - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FNGS drawdown since its inception was -48.98%, smaller than the maximum BNKU drawdown of -61.21%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FNGS and BNKU.

Drawdown Indicators

	FNGS	BNKU	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-48.98%	-61.21%	+12.23%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-22.93%	-40.97%	+18.04%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-26.77%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-48.98%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-7.74%	-7.55%	-0.19%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-10.80%	-16.77%	+5.97%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	8.61%	15.55%	-6.94%

Volatility

FNGS vs. BNKU - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for MicroSectors FANG+ ETN (FNGS) is 5.87%, while MicroSectors U.S. Big Banks Index 3X Leveraged ETNs (BNKU) has a volatility of 18.44%. This indicates that FNGS experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than BNKU based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FNGS	BNKU	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.87%	18.44%	-12.57%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	18.36%	46.92%	-28.56%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	22.86%	59.78%	-36.92%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	30.29%	72.00%	-41.71%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	31.07%	72.00%	-40.93%

FNGS vs. BNKU - Expense Ratio Comparison

FNGS has a 0.58% expense ratio, which is lower than BNKU's 0.95% expense ratio.

Dividends

FNGS vs. BNKU - Dividend Comparison

Neither FNGS nor BNKU has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FNGS and BNKU in my portfolio?

FNGS and BNKU have a correlation of 0.34, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, FNGS or BNKU?

BNKU has higher volatility (18.44%) compared to FNGS (5.87%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FNGS dropped -48.98% vs BNKU's -61.21%.

Which ETF is better, FNGS or BNKU?

On 1-year performance, BNKU leads with 97.48% vs 15.45% for FNGS. On fees, FNGS is cheaper at 0.58% per year. On volatility, FNGS has been the lower-risk option at 5.87%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FNGS or BNKU?

Over the 1-year period, BNKU has performed better with a 97.48% return vs 15.45%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FNGS or BNKU?

FNGS is cheaper with a 0.58% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for BNKU.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, FNGS or BNKU?

FNGS and BNKU have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

What is the main difference between FNGS and BNKU?

FNGS is categorized as Large Cap Growth Equities, while BNKU is Leveraged Equities. FNGS tracks NYSE FANG+ Index, while BNKU tracks Solactive MicroSectors U.S. Big Banks Index (-300%). Their fees differ too: 0.58% for FNGS and 0.95% for BNKU.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

BNKU currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.41 vs 0.52), 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.