GDXU vs. FNGD

Last updated Jun 25, 2026

GDXU (MicroSectors Gold Miners 3X Leveraged ETNs due June 29, 2040) and FNGD (MicroSectors FANG+™ Index -3X Inverse Leveraged ETN) are both Leveraged Equities funds from BMO - GDXU tracks the S-Network MicroSectors Gold Miners Index while FNGD tracks the NYSE FANG+ Index (-300%). Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, GDXU returned -13.05%/yr vs -62.21%/yr for FNGD. At a correlation of -0.23, they often move in opposite directions. Both charge a 0.95% expense ratio.

Performance

GDXU vs. FNGD - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in MicroSectors Gold Miners 3X Leveraged ETNs due June 29, 2040 (GDXU) and MicroSectors FANG+™ Index -3X Inverse Leveraged ETN (FNGD). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, GDXU achieves a -66.09% return, which is significantly lower than FNGD's -25.43% return.

GDXU

• 1D: -12.30%
• 1M: -41.51%
• YTD: -66.09%
• 6M: -70.80%
• 1Y: 14.54%
• 3Y*: 31.96%
• 5Y*: -13.05%
• 10Y*: —

FNGD

• 1D: 2.34%
• 1M: 4.80%
• YTD: -25.43%
• 6M: -21.40%
• 1Y: -46.02%
• 3Y*: -65.22%
• 5Y*: -62.21%
• 10Y*: —

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

GDXU vs. FNGD - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
GDXU MicroSectors Gold Miners 3X Leveraged ETNs due June 29, 2040	-66.09%	796.47%	-18.60%	-21.36%	-62.82%	-54.93%	4.32%
FNGD MicroSectors FANG+™ Index -3X Inverse Leveraged ETN	-25.43%	-61.42%	-76.57%	-90.14%	52.21%	-60.04%	-23.10%

Correlation

The correlation between GDXU and FNGD is -0.31, 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 (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.31
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	-0.22
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	-0.22
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 3, 2020	-0.23

GDXU vs. FNGD - Sectors Allocation Comparison

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

Return for Risk

GDXU vs. FNGD — Risk / Return Rank

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

GDXU

GDXU Risk / Return Rank: 16
GDXU Sharpe Ratio Rank: 10
GDXU Sortino Ratio Rank: 22
GDXU Omega Ratio Rank: 24
GDXU Calmar Ratio Rank: 11
GDXU Martin Ratio Rank: 10

FNGD

FNGD Risk / Return Rank: 3
FNGD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4
FNGD Sortino Ratio Rank: 4
FNGD Omega Ratio Rank: 4
FNGD Calmar Ratio Rank: 3
FNGD 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.

GDXU vs. FNGD - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for MicroSectors Gold Miners 3X Leveraged ETNs due June 29, 2040 (GDXU) and MicroSectors FANG+™ Index -3X Inverse Leveraged ETN (FNGD). 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.

	GDXU	FNGD	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.10	-0.71	+0.81
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.16	-0.86	+2.03
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.16	0.90	+0.25
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.17	-0.70	+0.87
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	0.36	-1.45	+1.81

GDXU vs. FNGD - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current GDXU Sharpe Ratio is 0.10, which is higher than the FNGD Sharpe Ratio of -0.71. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of GDXU and FNGD, 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

GDXU vs. FNGD - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GDXU drawdown since its inception was -94.39%, smaller than the maximum FNGD drawdown of -100.00%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GDXU and FNGD.

Drawdown Indicators

	GDXU	FNGD	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-94.39%	-100.00%	+5.61%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-84.26%	-65.92%	-18.34%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-84.26%	-97.35%	+13.09%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-91.30%	-99.67%	+8.37%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-84.26%	-100.00%	+15.74%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-69.81%	-87.30%	+17.49%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	40.46%	32.73%	+7.73%

Volatility

GDXU vs. FNGD - Volatility Comparison

MicroSectors Gold Miners 3X Leveraged ETNs due June 29, 2040 (GDXU) has a higher volatility of 56.27% compared to MicroSectors FANG+™ Index -3X Inverse Leveraged ETN (FNGD) at 33.11%. This indicates that GDXU's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FNGD based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	GDXU	FNGD	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	56.27%	33.11%	+23.16%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	126.69%	53.19%	+73.50%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	144.88%	65.48%	+79.40%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	112.55%	89.66%	+22.89%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	111.34%	91.28%	+20.06%

GDXU vs. FNGD - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both GDXU and FNGD have an expense ratio of 0.95%.

Dividends

GDXU vs. FNGD - Dividend Comparison

Neither GDXU nor FNGD has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both GDXU and FNGD in my portfolio?

GDXU and FNGD have a correlation of -0.31, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, GDXU or FNGD?

GDXU has higher volatility (56.27%) compared to FNGD (33.11%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GDXU dropped -94.39% vs FNGD's -100.00%.

Which ETF is better, GDXU or FNGD?

On 5-year performance, GDXU leads with -13.05% vs -62.21% for FNGD. Both ETFs have the same 0.95% expense ratio. On volatility, FNGD has been the lower-risk option at 33.11%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, GDXU or FNGD?

Over the 5-year period, GDXU has performed better with a -13.05% return vs -62.21%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, GDXU or FNGD?

GDXU and FNGD have the same expense ratio: 0.95% per year.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, GDXU or FNGD?

GDXU and FNGD have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

What is the main difference between GDXU and FNGD?

GDXU tracks S-Network MicroSectors Gold Miners Index, while FNGD tracks NYSE FANG+ Index (-300%).

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

GDXU currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.10 vs -0.71), 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.