FNGS vs. ILCG
FNGS (MicroSectors FANG+ ETN) and ILCG (iShares Morningstar Growth ETF) are both Large Cap Growth Equities funds - FNGS tracks the NYSE FANG+ Index while ILCG tracks the Morningstar US Large-Mid Cap Broad Growth Index Gross. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, FNGS returned 22.01%/yr vs 14.95%/yr for ILCG. Their correlation of 0.89 suggests significant overlap in exposure. FNGS charges 0.58%/yr vs 0.04%/yr for ILCG.
Performance
FNGS vs. ILCG - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, FNGS achieves a 16.26% return, which is significantly higher than ILCG's 14.48% return.
FNGS
- 1D
- -0.98%
- 1M
- 11.24%
- YTD
- 16.26%
- 6M
- 10.77%
- 1Y
- 29.78%
- 3Y*
- 35.29%
- 5Y*
- 22.01%
- 10Y*
- —
ILCG
- 1D
- -1.02%
- 1M
- 7.68%
- YTD
- 14.48%
- 6M
- 14.61%
- 1Y
- 29.51%
- 3Y*
- 26.55%
- 5Y*
- 14.95%
- 10Y*
- 18.15%
FNGS vs. ILCG - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FNGS MicroSectors FANG+ ETN | 16.26% | 18.64% | 51.99% | 95.24% | -40.32% | 16.96% | 101.99% | 10.91% |
ILCG iShares Morningstar Growth ETF | 14.48% | 16.71% | 32.82% | 40.41% | -31.75% | 24.33% | 38.56% | 6.67% |
Correlation
The correlation between FNGS and ILCG is 0.85, 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 | 0.85 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.90 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.90 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 14, 2019 | 0.89 |
The correlation between FNGS and ILCG has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.85 to 0.90 - a consistent structural relationship.
FNGS vs. ILCG - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
FNGS
ILCG
Technology
Communication Services
Consumer Cyclical
Financial Services
Basic Materials
-
Consumer Defensive
-
Energy
-
Healthcare
-
Industrials
-
Real Estate
-
Utilities
-
Technology
FNGS
ILCG
Communication Services
FNGS
ILCG
Consumer Cyclical
FNGS
ILCG
Financial Services
FNGS
ILCG
Basic Materials
FNGS
-
ILCG
Consumer Defensive
FNGS
-
ILCG
Energy
FNGS
-
ILCG
Healthcare
FNGS
-
ILCG
Industrials
FNGS
-
ILCG
Real Estate
FNGS
-
ILCG
Utilities
FNGS
-
ILCG
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. ILCG — Risk / Return Rank
FNGS
ILCG
FNGS vs. ILCG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for MicroSectors FANG+ ETN (FNGS) and iShares Morningstar Growth ETF (ILCG). 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.
| FNGS | ILCG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.36 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.41 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.26 | 1.32 | -0.06 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.30 | 1.89 | -0.59 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 3.77 | 6.68 | -2.91 |
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
| FNGS | ILCG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.46 | 1.82 | -0.36 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.74 | 0.68 | +0.06 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | — | 0.85 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 1.06 | 0.59 | +0.47 |
Drawdowns
FNGS vs. ILCG - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum FNGS drawdown since its inception was -48.98%, smaller than the maximum ILCG drawdown of -52.98%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FNGS and ILCG.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| FNGS | ILCG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -48.98% | -52.98% | +4.00% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -22.93% | -15.65% | -7.28% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -26.77% | -23.10% | -3.67% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -48.98% | -35.38% | -13.60% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -35.38% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -1.61% | -1.02% | -0.59% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -10.87% | -8.22% | -2.65% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 7.92% | 4.43% | +3.49% |
Volatility
FNGS vs. ILCG - Volatility Comparison
MicroSectors FANG+ ETN (FNGS) has a higher volatility of 5.64% compared to iShares Morningstar Growth ETF (ILCG) at 4.40%. This indicates that FNGS's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than ILCG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| FNGS | ILCG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 5.64% | 4.40% | +1.24% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 15.68% | 12.81% | +2.87% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 20.49% | 16.31% | +4.18% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 29.96% | 22.00% | +7.96% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 31.12% | 21.53% | +9.59% |
FNGS vs. ILCG - Expense Ratio Comparison
FNGS has a 0.58% expense ratio, which is higher than ILCG's 0.04% expense ratio.
Dividends
FNGS vs. ILCG - Dividend Comparison
FNGS has not paid dividends to shareholders, while ILCG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.40%.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FNGS MicroSectors FANG+ 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% |
ILCG iShares Morningstar Growth ETF | 0.40% | 0.47% | 0.50% | 0.69% | 0.75% | 0.34% | 0.28% | 0.54% | 0.81% | 0.89% | 0.95% | 0.99% |
Frequently Asked Questions
FNGS and ILCG have a correlation of 0.85, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
FNGS has higher volatility (5.64%) compared to ILCG (4.40%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FNGS dropped -48.98% vs ILCG's -52.98%.
On 5-year performance, FNGS leads with 22.01% vs 14.95% for ILCG. On fees, ILCG is cheaper at 0.04% per year. On volatility, ILCG has been the lower-risk option at 4.40%. 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 22.01% return vs 14.95%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
ILCG is cheaper with a 0.04% expense ratio, compared with 0.58% for FNGS.
ILCG has the higher dividend yield at 0.40%, compared with 0.00% for FNGS.
FNGS tracks NYSE FANG+ Index, while ILCG tracks Morningstar US Large-Mid Cap Broad Growth Index Gross. They also come from different issuers: BMO and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.58% for FNGS and 0.04% for ILCG.
ILCG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.82 vs 1.46), 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 ILCG
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