GQGU vs. BULZ

Last updated Jun 23, 2026

GQGU (GQG US Equity ETF) and BULZ (MicroSectors FANG & Innovation 3X Leveraged ETNs) are both exchange-traded funds - GQGU is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund actively managed by GQG Partners, while BULZ is a Leveraged Equities fund tracking the Solactive FANG Innovation Index (300%). GQGU is actively managed, while BULZ is passively managed. At a correlation of -0.35, they often move in opposite directions. GQGU charges 0.49%/yr vs 0.95%/yr for BULZ.

Performance

GQGU vs. BULZ - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in GQG US Equity ETF (GQGU) and MicroSectors FANG & Innovation 3X Leveraged ETNs (BULZ). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, GQGU achieves a 2.89% return, which is significantly lower than BULZ's 61.20% return.

GQGU

• 1D: 0.48%
• 1M: -5.32%
• YTD: 2.89%
• 6M: 3.26%
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

BULZ

• 1D: -2.95%
• 1M: -4.19%
• YTD: 61.20%
• 6M: 55.42%
• 1Y: 175.88%
• 3Y*: 82.14%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

GQGU vs. BULZ - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
GQGU GQG US Equity ETF	2.89%	-1.12%
BULZ MicroSectors FANG & Innovation 3X Leveraged ETNs	61.20%	43.59%

Correlation

The correlation between GQGU and BULZ is -0.35, 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 Jul 14, 2025	-0.35

Return for Risk

GQGU vs. BULZ — Risk / Return Rank

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

GQGU

Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.

BULZ

BULZ Risk / Return Rank: 59
BULZ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 72
BULZ Sortino Ratio Rank: 52
BULZ Omega Ratio Rank: 54
BULZ Calmar Ratio Rank: 67
BULZ Martin Ratio Rank: 51

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.

GQGU vs. BULZ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for GQG US Equity ETF (GQGU) and MicroSectors FANG & Innovation 3X Leveraged ETNs (BULZ). 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.

	GQGU	BULZ	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	—	2.24	—
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	—	2.44	—
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	—	1.32	—
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	—	3.26	—
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	—	8.46	—

Drawdowns

GQGU vs. BULZ - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GQGU drawdown since its inception was -8.41%, smaller than the maximum BULZ drawdown of -94.44%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GQGU and BULZ.

Drawdown Indicators

	GQGU	BULZ	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-8.41%	-94.44%	+86.03%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	—	-54.22%	—
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-67.96%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-7.97%	-24.05%	+16.08%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.69%	-58.04%	+55.35%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	—	20.87%	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	GQGU	BULZ	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	—	33.09%	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	—	62.60%	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	10.38%	79.22%	-68.84%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	10.38%	91.72%	-81.34%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	10.38%	91.72%	-81.34%

GQGU vs. BULZ - Expense Ratio Comparison

GQGU has a 0.49% expense ratio, which is lower than BULZ's 0.95% expense ratio.

Dividends

GQGU vs. BULZ - Dividend Comparison

GQGU's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.99%, while BULZ has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025
BULZ MicroSectors FANG & Innovation 3X Leveraged ETNs	0.00%	0.00%
GQGU GQG US Equity ETF	0.99%	1.02%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both GQGU and BULZ in my portfolio?

GQGU and BULZ have a correlation of -0.35, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, GQGU or BULZ?

On fees, GQGU is cheaper at 0.49% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, GQGU or BULZ?

GQGU is cheaper with a 0.49% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for BULZ.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, GQGU or BULZ?

GQGU has the higher dividend yield at 0.99%, compared with 0.00% for BULZ.

What is the main difference between GQGU and BULZ?

GQGU is categorized as Large Cap Growth Equities, while BULZ is Leveraged Equities. They also come from different issuers: GQG Partners and BMO. Their fees differ too: 0.49% for GQGU and 0.95% for BULZ.