GDXU vs. FNGS

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

GDXU (MicroSectors Gold Miners 3X Leveraged ETN) and FNGS (MicroSectors FANG+ ETN) are both exchange-traded funds - GDXU is a Leveraged Equities fund tracking the S-Network MicroSectors Gold Miners Index, while FNGS is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund tracking the NYSE FANG+ Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, GDXU returned -10.23%/yr vs 21.41%/yr for FNGS. At a 0.22 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. GDXU charges 0.95%/yr vs 0.58%/yr for FNGS.

Performance

GDXU vs. FNGS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in MicroSectors Gold Miners 3X Leveraged ETN (GDXU) and MicroSectors FANG+ ETN (FNGS). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, GDXU achieves a -41.62% return, which is significantly lower than FNGS's 13.45% return.

GDXU

• 1D: 3.90%
• 1M: -8.04%
• YTD: -41.62%
• 6M: -31.92%
• 1Y: 76.85%
• 3Y*: 47.72%
• 5Y*: -10.23%
• 10Y*: —

FNGS

• 1D: -2.42%
• 1M: 7.85%
• YTD: 13.45%
• 6M: 8.38%
• 1Y: 26.37%
• 3Y*: 33.92%
• 5Y*: 21.41%
• 10Y*: —

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

GDXU vs. FNGS - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
GDXU MicroSectors Gold Miners 3X Leveraged ETN	-41.62%	796.47%	-18.60%	-21.36%	-62.82%	-54.93%	4.66%
FNGS MicroSectors FANG+ ETN	13.45%	18.64%	51.99%	95.24%	-40.32%	16.96%	7.92%

Correlation

The correlation between GDXU and FNGS is 0.25, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.25
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.19
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.20
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 4, 2020	0.22

GDXU vs. FNGS - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	GDXU	FNGS
Basic Materials	100.0%	-
Communication Services	-	28.8%
Consumer Cyclical	-	11.3%
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Energy	-	-
Financial Services	-	10.0%
Healthcare	-	-
Industrials	-	-
Real Estate	-	-
Technology	-	59.9%
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

GDXU vs. FNGS — Risk / Return Rank

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

GDXU

GDXU Risk / Return Rank: 25
GDXU Sharpe Ratio Rank: 19
GDXU Sortino Ratio Rank: 30
GDXU Omega Ratio Rank: 33
GDXU Calmar Ratio Rank: 23
GDXU Martin Ratio Rank: 19

FNGS

FNGS Risk / Return Rank: 32
FNGS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 37
FNGS Sortino Ratio Rank: 36
FNGS Omega Ratio Rank: 35
FNGS Calmar Ratio Rank: 25
FNGS Martin Ratio Rank: 25

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. FNGS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for MicroSectors Gold Miners 3X Leveraged ETN (GDXU) and MicroSectors FANG+ ETN (FNGS). 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.

	GDXU	FNGS	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.56	1.28	-0.72
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.56	1.81	-0.25
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.22	1.23	-0.01
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.04	1.16	-0.11
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	2.11	3.33	-1.22
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

GDXU vs. FNGS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current GDXU Sharpe Ratio is 0.56, which is lower than the FNGS Sharpe Ratio of 1.28. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of GDXU and FNGS, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	GDXU	FNGS	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.56	1.28	-0.72
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	-0.09	0.72	-0.81
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	-0.08	1.04	-1.12

Drawdowns

GDXU vs. FNGS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GDXU drawdown since its inception was -94.39%, which is greater than FNGS's maximum drawdown of -48.98%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GDXU and FNGS.

Drawdown Indicators

	GDXU	FNGS	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-94.39%	-48.98%	-45.41%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-73.99%	-22.93%	-51.06%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-73.99%	-26.77%	-47.22%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-92.93%	-48.98%	-43.95%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-72.90%	-3.99%	-68.91%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-69.77%	-10.86%	-58.91%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	36.52%	7.93%	+28.59%

Volatility

GDXU vs. FNGS - Volatility Comparison

MicroSectors Gold Miners 3X Leveraged ETN (GDXU) has a higher volatility of 46.65% compared to MicroSectors FANG+ ETN (FNGS) at 6.36%. This indicates that GDXU's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FNGS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	GDXU	FNGS	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	46.65%	6.36%	+40.29%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	118.08%	15.88%	+102.20%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	137.54%	20.64%	+116.90%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	110.85%	29.97%	+80.88%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	110.00%	31.13%	+78.87%

GDXU vs. FNGS - Expense Ratio Comparison

GDXU has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is higher than FNGS's 0.58% expense ratio.

Dividends

GDXU vs. FNGS - Dividend Comparison

Neither GDXU nor FNGS has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both GDXU and FNGS in my portfolio?

GDXU and FNGS have a correlation of 0.25, 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 FNGS?

GDXU has higher volatility (46.65%) compared to FNGS (6.36%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GDXU dropped -94.39% vs FNGS's -48.98%.

Which ETF is better, GDXU or FNGS?

On 5-year performance, FNGS leads with 21.41% vs -10.23% for GDXU. On fees, FNGS is cheaper at 0.58% per year. On volatility, FNGS has been the lower-risk option at 6.36%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, GDXU or FNGS?

Over the 5-year period, FNGS has performed better with a 21.41% return vs -10.23%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, GDXU or FNGS?

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

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

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

What is the main difference between GDXU and FNGS?

GDXU is categorized as Leveraged Equities, while FNGS is Large Cap Growth Equities. GDXU tracks S-Network MicroSectors Gold Miners Index, while FNGS tracks NYSE FANG+ Index. Their fees differ too: 0.95% for GDXU and 0.58% for FNGS.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FNGS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.28 vs 0.56), 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.