FNGS vs. QLD
Compare and contrast key facts about MicroSectors FANG+ ETN (FNGS) and ProShares Ultra QQQ (QLD).
FNGS and QLD are both exchange-traded funds (ETFs), meaning they are traded on stock exchanges and can be bought and sold throughout the day. FNGS is a passively managed fund by BMO Financial Group that tracks the performance of the NYSE FANG+ Index. It was launched on Nov 12, 2019. QLD is a passively managed fund by ProShares that tracks the performance of the NASDAQ-100 Index (200%). It was launched on Jun 21, 2006. Both FNGS and QLD are passive ETFs, meaning that they are not actively managed but aim to replicate the performance of the underlying index as closely as possible.
Scroll down to visually compare performance, riskiness, drawdowns, and other indicators and decide which better suits your portfolio: FNGS or QLD.
Key characteristics
| FNGS | QLD | |
|---|---|---|
| YTD Return | 15.85% | 12.39% |
| 1Y Return | 57.89% | 70.05% |
| 3Y Return (Ann) | 16.37% | 12.28% |
| Sharpe Ratio | 2.56 | 2.27 |
| Daily Std Dev | 23.79% | 32.54% |
| Max Drawdown | -48.98% | -83.13% |
| Current Drawdown | -2.02% | -6.91% |
Correlation
The correlation between FNGS and QLD is 0.91, which is considered to be high. That indicates a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Having highly-correlated positions in a portfolio may signal a lack of diversification, potentially leading to increased risk during market downturns.
Performance
FNGS vs. QLD - Performance Comparison
In the year-to-date period, FNGS achieves a 15.85% return, which is significantly higher than QLD's 12.39% return. The chart below displays the growth of a $10,000 investment in both assets, with all prices adjusted for splits and dividends.
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
FNGS vs. QLD - Expense Ratio Comparison
FNGS has a 0.58% expense ratio, which is lower than QLD's 0.95% expense ratio.
Risk-Adjusted Performance
FNGS vs. QLD - Risk-Adjusted Performance Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for MicroSectors FANG+ ETN (FNGS) and ProShares Ultra QQQ (QLD). 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.
Dividends
FNGS vs. QLD - Dividend Comparison
FNGS has not paid dividends to shareholders, while QLD's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.36%.
| TTM | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 | 2014 | 2013 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
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% |
QLD ProShares Ultra QQQ | 0.36% | 0.33% | 0.31% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.13% | 0.06% | 0.02% | 0.24% | 0.11% | 0.19% | 0.13% |
Drawdowns
FNGS vs. QLD - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum FNGS drawdown since its inception was -48.98%, smaller than the maximum QLD drawdown of -83.13%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FNGS and QLD. For additional features, visit the drawdowns tool.
Volatility
FNGS vs. QLD - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for MicroSectors FANG+ ETN (FNGS) is 8.48%, while ProShares Ultra QQQ (QLD) has a volatility of 11.48%. This indicates that FNGS experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than QLD based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.