FNGS vs. FNGU

Last updated Aug 2, 2026

FNGS (MicroSectors FANG+ ETN) and FNGU (MicroSectors FANG+ 3X Leveraged ETNs) are both exchange-traded funds - FNGS is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund tracking the NYSE FANG+ Index, while FNGU is a Leveraged Equities fund tracking the NYSE FANG+ Index (Gross Total Return) (300%). Both are passively managed. Over the past year, FNGS returned 15.45% vs 13.50% for FNGU. Their 0.98 correlation means they have historically moved very closely together. FNGS charges 0.58%/yr vs 2.60%/yr for FNGU.

Performance

FNGS vs. FNGU - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in MicroSectors FANG+ ETN (FNGS) and MicroSectors FANG+ 3X Leveraged ETNs (FNGU). 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 higher than FNGU's 5.54% 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%

FNGU

• 1D: 5.13%
• 1M: 0.64%
• 6M: 18.28%
• YTD: 5.54%
• 1Y: 13.50%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 5.98%

*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)
FNGS MicroSectors FANG+ ETN	$1.57M	$1.92M	$2.40M
FNGU MicroSectors FANG+ 3X Leveraged ETNs	$92.08M	$119.18M	$153.90M

FNGS vs. FNGU - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
FNGS MicroSectors FANG+ ETN	9.02%	12.22%
FNGU MicroSectors FANG+ 3X Leveraged ETNs	5.54%	3.02%

Correlation

The correlation between FNGS and FNGU is 0.98 - they have historically moved very closely together. At this level, their price movements offset little of one another.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.98
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 20, 2025	0.98

The correlation between FNGS and FNGU has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.98 to 0.98 - a consistent structural relationship.

FNGS vs. FNGU - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	FNGS	FNGU
Technology	59.6%	60.6%
Communication Services	30.0%	29.8%
Consumer Cyclical	10.4%	9.6%
Financial Services	10.0%	-
Basic Materials	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Energy	-	-
Healthcare	-	-
Industrials	-	-
Real Estate	-	-
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

FNGS vs. FNGU — 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

FNGU

FNGU Risk / Return Rank: 14
FNGU Sharpe Ratio Rank: 12
FNGU Sortino Ratio Rank: 17
FNGU Omega Ratio Rank: 17
FNGU Calmar Ratio Rank: 12
FNGU Martin Ratio Rank: 12

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. FNGU - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for MicroSectors FANG+ ETN (FNGS) and MicroSectors FANG+ 3X Leveraged ETNs (FNGU). 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	FNGU	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.52	0.07	+0.45
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.86	0.56	+0.30
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.10	1.07	+0.04
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.51	0.07	+0.44
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	1.37	0.16	+1.21

FNGS vs. FNGU - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FNGS Sharpe Ratio is 0.52, which is higher than the FNGU Sharpe Ratio of 0.07. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FNGS and FNGU, 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. FNGU - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FNGS drawdown since its inception was -48.98%, smaller than the maximum FNGU drawdown of -61.30%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FNGS and FNGU.

Drawdown Indicators

	FNGS	FNGU	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-48.98%	-61.30%	+12.32%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-22.93%	-59.55%	+36.62%
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%	-26.25%	+18.51%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-10.80%	-22.61%	+11.81%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	8.61%	26.68%	-18.07%

Volatility

FNGS vs. FNGU - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for MicroSectors FANG+ ETN (FNGS) is 5.87%, while MicroSectors FANG+ 3X Leveraged ETNs (FNGU) has a volatility of 17.87%. This indicates that FNGS experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FNGU based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FNGS	FNGU	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.87%	17.87%	-12.00%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	18.36%	53.81%	-35.45%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	22.86%	65.86%	-43.00%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	30.29%	79.67%	-49.38%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	31.07%	79.67%	-48.60%

FNGS vs. FNGU - Expense Ratio Comparison

FNGS has a 0.58% expense ratio, which is lower than FNGU's 2.60% expense ratio.

Dividends

FNGS vs. FNGU - Dividend Comparison

Neither FNGS nor FNGU has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FNGS and FNGU in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.98, FNGS and FNGU move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

Which is riskier, FNGS or FNGU?

FNGU has higher volatility (17.87%) compared to FNGS (5.87%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FNGS dropped -48.98% vs FNGU's -61.30%.

Which ETF is better, FNGS or FNGU?

On 1-year performance, FNGS leads with 15.45% vs 13.50% for FNGU. 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 FNGU?

Over the 1-year period, FNGS has performed better with a 15.45% return vs 13.50%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FNGS or FNGU?

FNGS is cheaper with a 0.58% expense ratio, compared with 2.60% for FNGU.

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

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

What is the main difference between FNGS and FNGU?

FNGS is categorized as Large Cap Growth Equities, while FNGU is Leveraged Equities. FNGS tracks NYSE FANG+ Index, while FNGU tracks NYSE FANG+ Index (Gross Total Return) (300%). Their fees differ too: 0.58% for FNGS and 2.60% for FNGU.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FNGS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.52 vs 0.07), 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.