FNGS vs. NRGD

Last updated Jul 14, 2026

FNGS (MicroSectors FANG+ ETN) and NRGD (MicroSectors U.S. Big Oil Index -3X Inverse Leveraged ETN) are both exchange-traded funds - FNGS is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund tracking the NYSE FANG+ Index, while NRGD is a Leveraged Equities fund tracking the Solactive MicroSectors U.S. Big Oil Index (-300%). Both are passively managed. Over the past year, FNGS returned 16.52% vs -73.89% for NRGD. At a 0.03 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. FNGS charges 0.58%/yr vs 0.95%/yr for NRGD.

Performance

FNGS vs. NRGD - Performance Comparison

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FNGS achieves a 10.39% return, which is significantly higher than NRGD's -71.23% return.

FNGS

• 1D: -0.50%
• 1M: 3.37%
• 6M: 9.86%
• YTD: 10.39%
• 1Y: 16.52%
• 3Y*: 29.28%
• 5Y*: 18.67%
• 10Y*: —

NRGD

• 1D: -12.87%
• 1M: -11.15%
• 6M: -67.30%
• YTD: -71.23%
• 1Y: -73.89%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

FNGS vs. NRGD - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
FNGS MicroSectors FANG+ ETN	10.39%	12.22%
NRGD MicroSectors U.S. Big Oil Index -3X Inverse Leveraged ETN	-71.23%	-35.40%

Correlation

The correlation between FNGS and NRGD is 0.18, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.18
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 20, 2025	0.03

The correlation between FNGS and NRGD shifts across timeframes, from 0.03 (all time) to 0.18 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

FNGS vs. NRGD - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	FNGS	NRGD
Technology	63.4%	-
Communication Services	26.0%	-
Consumer Cyclical	10.6%	-
Financial Services	10.0%	-
Basic Materials	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Energy	-	100.0%
Healthcare	-	-
Industrials	-	-
Real Estate	-	-
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

FNGS vs. NRGD — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

FNGS

FNGS Risk / Return Rank: 23
FNGS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 26
FNGS Sortino Ratio Rank: 24
FNGS Omega Ratio Rank: 25
FNGS Calmar Ratio Rank: 20
FNGS Martin Ratio Rank: 21

NRGD

NRGD Risk / Return Rank: 1
NRGD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2
NRGD Sortino Ratio Rank: 1
NRGD Omega Ratio Rank: 1
NRGD Calmar Ratio Rank: 1
NRGD Martin Ratio Rank: 1

The rank (0–100) shows how this investment's returns compare to the risk taken. Higher = better. Based on the past 12 months of data, combining Sharpe, Sortino, and other metrics used by quantitative funds and institutional investors.

FNGS vs. NRGD - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for MicroSectors FANG+ ETN (FNGS) and MicroSectors U.S. Big Oil Index -3X Inverse Leveraged ETN (NRGD). 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	NRGD	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.74	-0.98	+1.72
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.14	-1.88	+3.03
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.14	0.80	+0.34
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.72	-0.94	+1.67
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	1.98	-1.48	+3.45

FNGS vs. NRGD - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FNGS Sharpe Ratio is 0.74, which is higher than the NRGD Sharpe Ratio of -0.98. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FNGS and NRGD, 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. NRGD - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FNGS drawdown since its inception was -48.98%, smaller than the maximum NRGD drawdown of -89.64%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FNGS and NRGD.

Drawdown Indicators

	FNGS	NRGD	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-48.98%	-89.64%	+40.66%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-22.93%	-78.53%	+55.60%
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	-6.58%	-89.44%	+82.86%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-10.82%	-60.82%	+50.00%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	8.38%	49.95%	-41.57%

Volatility

FNGS vs. NRGD - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for MicroSectors FANG+ ETN (FNGS) is 8.13%, while MicroSectors U.S. Big Oil Index -3X Inverse Leveraged ETN (NRGD) has a volatility of 26.28%. This indicates that FNGS experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than NRGD based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FNGS	NRGD	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	8.13%	26.28%	-18.15%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	17.98%	60.05%	-42.07%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	22.39%	75.76%	-53.37%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	30.24%	88.65%	-58.41%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	31.13%	88.65%	-57.52%

FNGS vs. NRGD - Expense Ratio Comparison

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

Dividends

FNGS vs. NRGD - Dividend Comparison

Neither FNGS nor NRGD has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FNGS and NRGD in my portfolio?

FNGS and NRGD have a correlation of 0.18, 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 NRGD?

NRGD has higher volatility (26.28%) compared to FNGS (8.13%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FNGS dropped -48.98% vs NRGD's -89.64%.

Which ETF is better, FNGS or NRGD?

On 1-year performance, FNGS leads with 16.52% vs -73.89% for NRGD. On fees, FNGS is cheaper at 0.58% per year. On volatility, FNGS has been the lower-risk option at 8.13%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FNGS or NRGD?

Over the 1-year period, FNGS has performed better with a 16.52% return vs -73.89%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FNGS or NRGD?

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

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

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

What is the main difference between FNGS and NRGD?

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

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FNGS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.74 vs -0.98), 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.