FTMA vs. NRGU
FTMA (Franklin Massachusetts Municipal Income ETF) and NRGU (MicroSectors U.S. Big Oil Index 3X Leveraged ETN) are both exchange-traded funds - FTMA is a Municipal Bonds fund tracking the Actively Managed, while NRGU is a Leveraged Equities fund tracking the Solactive MicroSectors U.S. Big Oil Index (-300%). Both are passively managed. At a correlation of -0.29, they often move in opposite directions. FTMA charges 0.35%/yr vs 0.95%/yr for NRGU.
Performance
FTMA vs. NRGU - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, FTMA achieves a 2.13% return, which is significantly lower than NRGU's 118.00% return.
FTMA
- 1D
- -0.11%
- 1M
- -0.09%
- 6M
- 1.68%
- YTD
- 2.13%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
NRGU
- 1D
- 3.84%
- 1M
- 18.77%
- 6M
- 86.19%
- YTD
- 118.00%
- 1Y
- 119.26%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
FTMA vs. NRGU - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
FTMA Franklin Massachusetts Municipal Income ETF | 2.13% | 0.54% |
NRGU MicroSectors U.S. Big Oil Index 3X Leveraged ETN | 118.00% | -5.35% |
Correlation
The correlation between FTMA and NRGU is -0.29, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 10, 2025 | -0.29 |
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
FTMA vs. NRGU — Risk / Return Rank
FTMA
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
NRGU
FTMA vs. NRGU - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Franklin Massachusetts Municipal Income ETF (FTMA) and MicroSectors U.S. Big Oil Index 3X Leveraged ETN (NRGU). 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.
| FTMA | NRGU | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | — | 1.26 | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | — | 2.73 | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | — | 6.13 | — |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
FTMA vs. NRGU - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum FTMA drawdown since its inception was -2.27%, smaller than the maximum NRGU drawdown of -57.50%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FTMA and NRGU.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| FTMA | NRGU | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -2.27% | -57.50% | +55.23% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | — | -43.89% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.71% | -24.81% | +24.10% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -0.44% | -26.06% | +25.62% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | — | 19.53% | — |
Volatility
FTMA vs. NRGU - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| FTMA | NRGU | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | — | 23.48% | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | — | 63.97% | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 3.28% | 76.98% | -73.70% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 3.28% | 89.07% | -85.79% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 3.28% | 89.07% | -85.79% |
FTMA vs. NRGU - Expense Ratio Comparison
FTMA has a 0.35% expense ratio, which is lower than NRGU's 0.95% expense ratio.
Dividends
FTMA vs. NRGU - Dividend Comparison
FTMA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.26%, while NRGU has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 |
|---|---|---|
FTMA Franklin Massachusetts Municipal Income ETF | 2.26% | 0.54% |
NRGU MicroSectors U.S. Big Oil Index 3X Leveraged ETN | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
FTMA and NRGU have a correlation of -0.29, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, FTMA is cheaper at 0.35% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
FTMA is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for NRGU.
FTMA has the higher dividend yield at 2.26%, compared with 0.00% for NRGU.
FTMA is categorized as Municipal Bonds, while NRGU is Leveraged Equities. FTMA tracks Actively Managed, while NRGU tracks Solactive MicroSectors U.S. Big Oil Index (-300%). They also come from different issuers: Franklin Templeton and BMO. Their fees differ too: 0.35% for FTMA and 0.95% for NRGU.
Find the right allocation for FTMA and NRGU
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