FNGS vs. SCHG
FNGS (MicroSectors FANG+ ETN) and SCHG (Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF) are both Large Cap Growth Equities funds - FNGS tracks the NYSE FANG+ Index while SCHG tracks the Dow Jones U.S. Large-Cap Growth Total Stock Market Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, FNGS returned 18.98%/yr vs 13.68%/yr for SCHG. Their correlation of 0.89 suggests significant overlap in exposure. FNGS charges 0.58%/yr vs 0.04%/yr for SCHG.
Performance
FNGS vs. SCHG - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, FNGS achieves a 8.21% return, which is significantly higher than SCHG's 2.76% return.
FNGS
- 1D
- -3.05%
- 1M
- -1.23%
- YTD
- 8.21%
- 6M
- 7.55%
- 1Y
- 20.76%
- 3Y*
- 30.34%
- 5Y*
- 18.98%
- 10Y*
- —
SCHG
- 1D
- -1.24%
- 1M
- -2.59%
- YTD
- 2.76%
- 6M
- 2.11%
- 1Y
- 20.89%
- 3Y*
- 22.70%
- 5Y*
- 13.68%
- 10Y*
- 18.81%
FNGS vs. SCHG - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FNGS MicroSectors FANG+ ETN | 8.21% | 18.64% | 51.99% | 95.24% | -40.32% | 16.96% | 101.99% | 10.10% |
SCHG Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF | 2.76% | 17.50% | 34.95% | 50.10% | -31.80% | 28.11% | 39.14% | 5.72% |
Correlation
The correlation between FNGS and SCHG is 0.87, 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 | 0.87 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.91 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.91 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 13, 2019 | 0.89 |
The correlation between FNGS and SCHG has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.87 to 0.91 - a consistent structural relationship.
FNGS vs. SCHG - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
FNGS
SCHG
Technology
Communication Services
Consumer Cyclical
Financial Services
Basic Materials
-
Consumer Defensive
-
Energy
-
Healthcare
-
Industrials
-
Real Estate
-
Utilities
-
Technology
FNGS
SCHG
Communication Services
FNGS
SCHG
Consumer Cyclical
FNGS
SCHG
Financial Services
FNGS
SCHG
Basic Materials
FNGS
-
SCHG
Consumer Defensive
FNGS
-
SCHG
Energy
FNGS
-
SCHG
Healthcare
FNGS
-
SCHG
Industrials
FNGS
-
SCHG
Real Estate
FNGS
-
SCHG
Utilities
FNGS
-
SCHG
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. SCHG — Risk / Return Rank
FNGS
SCHG
FNGS vs. SCHG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for MicroSectors FANG+ ETN (FNGS) and Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF (SCHG). 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 | SCHG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.37 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.41 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.17 | 1.23 | -0.06 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.91 | 1.28 | -0.37 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 2.56 | 4.19 | -1.62 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
FNGS vs. SCHG - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum FNGS drawdown since its inception was -48.98%, which is greater than SCHG's maximum drawdown of -34.59%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FNGS and SCHG.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| FNGS | SCHG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -48.98% | -34.59% | -14.39% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -22.93% | -16.41% | -6.52% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -26.77% | -23.39% | -3.38% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -48.98% | -34.59% | -14.39% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -34.59% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -8.42% | -5.16% | -3.26% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -10.84% | -5.20% | -5.64% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 8.11% | 5.00% | +3.11% |
Volatility
FNGS vs. SCHG - Volatility Comparison
MicroSectors FANG+ ETN (FNGS) has a higher volatility of 10.75% compared to Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF (SCHG) at 5.78%. This indicates that FNGS's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than SCHG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| FNGS | SCHG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 10.75% | 5.78% | +4.97% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 17.87% | 12.50% | +5.37% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 22.54% | 16.21% | +6.33% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 30.24% | 22.37% | +7.87% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 31.23% | 21.61% | +9.62% |
FNGS vs. SCHG - Expense Ratio Comparison
FNGS has a 0.58% expense ratio, which is higher than SCHG's 0.04% expense ratio.
Dividends
FNGS vs. SCHG - Dividend Comparison
FNGS has not paid dividends to shareholders, while SCHG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.38%.
| 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% |
SCHG Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF | 0.38% | 0.36% | 0.39% | 0.46% | 0.55% | 0.42% | 0.52% | 0.82% | 1.27% | 1.01% | 1.04% | 1.22% |
Frequently Asked Questions
FNGS and SCHG have a correlation of 0.87, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
FNGS has higher volatility (10.75%) compared to SCHG (5.78%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FNGS dropped -48.98% vs SCHG's -34.59%.
On 5-year performance, FNGS leads with 18.98% vs 13.68% for SCHG. On fees, SCHG is cheaper at 0.04% per year. On volatility, SCHG has been the lower-risk option at 5.78%. 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 13.68%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
SCHG is cheaper with a 0.04% expense ratio, compared with 0.58% for FNGS.
SCHG has the higher dividend yield at 0.38%, compared with 0.00% for FNGS.
FNGS tracks NYSE FANG+ Index, while SCHG tracks Dow Jones U.S. Large-Cap Growth Total Stock Market Index. They also come from different issuers: BMO and Charles Schwab. Their fees differ too: 0.58% for FNGS and 0.04% for SCHG.
SCHG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.30 vs 0.93), 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 SCHG
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