FNGS vs. GDXD
FNGS (MicroSectors FANG+ ETN) and GDXD (MicroSectors Gold Miners -3X Inverse Leveraged ETNs due June 29, 2040) are both exchange-traded funds - FNGS is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund tracking the NYSE FANG+ Index, while GDXD is a Inverse Equities fund tracking the S-Network MicroSectors Gold Miners Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, FNGS returned 18.98%/yr vs -73.29%/yr for GDXD. Their -0.23 correlation means they have often moved in opposite directions in the past. FNGS charges 0.58%/yr vs 0.95%/yr for GDXD.
Performance
FNGS vs. GDXD - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, FNGS achieves a 9.02% return, which is significantly higher than GDXD's -42.32% 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%
GDXD
- 1D
- 10.48%
- 1M
- 10.38%
- 6M
- -10.42%
- YTD
- -42.32%
- 1Y
- -91.93%
- 3Y*
- -83.55%
- 5Y*
- -73.29%
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- -70.78%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $1.57M | $1.92M | $2.40M | |
| $19.58M | $21.95M | $29.87M |
FNGS vs. GDXD - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FNGS MicroSectors FANG+ ETN | 9.02% | 18.64% | 51.99% | 95.24% | -40.32% | 16.96% | 8.21% |
GDXD MicroSectors Gold Miners -3X Inverse Leveraged ETNs due June 29, 2040 | -42.32% | -97.53% | -57.78% | -52.35% | -52.56% | -19.71% | -13.10% |
Correlation
The correlation between FNGS and GDXD is -0.33, meaning they have often moved in opposite directions in the past. This relationship can weaken or reverse as market conditions change.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most. | -0.33 |
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history. | -0.21 |
Correlation (5Y) Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period. | -0.22 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 3, 2020 | -0.23 |
The correlation between FNGS and GDXD shifts across timeframes, from -0.33 (1 year) to -0.21 (3 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
FNGS vs. GDXD - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
FNGS
GDXD
Technology
-
Communication Services
-
Consumer Cyclical
-
Financial Services
-
Basic Materials
-
Consumer Defensive
-
-
Energy
-
-
Healthcare
-
-
Industrials
-
-
Real Estate
-
-
Utilities
-
-
Technology
FNGS
GDXD
-
Communication Services
FNGS
GDXD
-
Consumer Cyclical
FNGS
GDXD
-
Financial Services
FNGS
GDXD
-
Basic Materials
FNGS
-
GDXD
Consumer Defensive
FNGS
-
GDXD
-
Energy
FNGS
-
GDXD
-
Healthcare
FNGS
-
GDXD
-
Industrials
FNGS
-
GDXD
-
Real Estate
FNGS
-
GDXD
-
Utilities
FNGS
-
GDXD
-
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
FNGS vs. GDXD — Risk / Return Rank
FNGS
GDXD
FNGS vs. GDXD - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for MicroSectors FANG+ ETN (FNGS) and MicroSectors Gold Miners -3X Inverse Leveraged ETNs due June 29, 2040 (GDXD). 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 | GDXD | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +1.15 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +2.35 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.10 | 0.84 | +0.26 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.51 | -0.96 | +1.48 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 1.37 | -1.11 | +2.48 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
FNGS vs. GDXD - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum FNGS drawdown since its inception was -48.98%, smaller than the maximum GDXD drawdown of -99.96%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FNGS and GDXD.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| FNGS | GDXD | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -48.98% | -99.96% | +50.98% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -22.93% | -95.95% | +73.02% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -26.77% | -99.86% | +73.09% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -48.98% | -99.96% | +50.98% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -7.74% | -99.92% | +92.18% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -10.80% | -72.59% | +61.79% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 8.61% | 83.56% | -74.95% |
Volatility
FNGS vs. GDXD - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for MicroSectors FANG+ ETN (FNGS) is 5.87%, while MicroSectors Gold Miners -3X Inverse Leveraged ETNs due June 29, 2040 (GDXD) has a volatility of 40.76%. This indicates that FNGS experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than GDXD based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| FNGS | GDXD | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 5.87% | 40.76% | -34.89% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 18.36% | 118.25% | -99.89% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 22.86% | 146.68% | -123.82% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 30.29% | 112.62% | -82.33% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 31.07% | 110.97% | -79.90% |
FNGS vs. GDXD - Expense Ratio Comparison
FNGS has a 0.58% expense ratio, which is lower than GDXD's 0.95% expense ratio.
Dividends
FNGS vs. GDXD - Dividend Comparison
Neither FNGS nor GDXD has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
FNGS and GDXD have a correlation of -0.33, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
GDXD has higher volatility (40.76%) compared to FNGS (5.87%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FNGS dropped -48.98% vs GDXD's -99.96%.
On 5-year performance, FNGS leads with 18.98% vs -73.29% for GDXD. 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.
Over the 5-year period, FNGS has performed better with a 18.98% return vs -73.29%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
FNGS is cheaper with a 0.58% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for GDXD.
FNGS and GDXD have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.
FNGS is categorized as Large Cap Growth Equities, while GDXD is Inverse Equities. FNGS tracks NYSE FANG+ Index, while GDXD tracks S-Network MicroSectors Gold Miners Index. Their fees differ too: 0.58% for FNGS and 0.95% for GDXD.
FNGS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.52 vs -0.63), 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 FNGS and GDXD
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