GSIB vs. FNGS

Last updated Apr 1, 2026

Compare and contrast key facts about Themes Global Systemically Important Banks ETF (GSIB) and MicroSectors FANG+ ETN (FNGS).

GSIB and FNGS are both exchange-traded funds (ETFs), meaning they are traded on stock exchanges and can be bought and sold throughout the day. GSIB is an actively managed fund by Themes. It was launched on Dec 14, 2023. FNGS is a passively managed fund by BMO that tracks the performance of the NYSE FANG+ Index. It was launched on Nov 12, 2019.

Performance

GSIB vs. FNGS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Themes Global Systemically Important Banks ETF (GSIB) and MicroSectors FANG+ ETN (FNGS). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

GSIB vs. FNGS - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
GSIB Themes Global Systemically Important Banks ETF	-3.15%	61.67%	32.86%	2.35%
FNGS MicroSectors FANG+ ETN	-12.40%	18.64%	51.99%	1.23%

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, GSIB achieves a -3.15% return, which is significantly higher than FNGS's -12.40% return.

GSIB

• 1D: 4.01%
• 1M: -4.96%
• YTD: -3.15%
• 6M: 7.71%
• 1Y: 36.96%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

FNGS

• 1D: 4.69%
• 1M: -4.21%
• YTD: -12.40%
• 6M: -14.82%
• 1Y: 19.65%
• 3Y*: 30.42%
• 5Y*: 15.68%
• 10Y*: —

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

GSIB vs. FNGS - Expense Ratio Comparison

GSIB has a 0.35% expense ratio, which is lower than FNGS's 0.58% expense ratio.

FNGS

MicroSectors FANG+ ETN

GSIB

Themes Global Systemically Important Banks ETF

Return for Risk

GSIB vs. FNGS — Risk / Return Rank

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

GSIB

GSIB Risk / Return Rank: 86
GSIB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 88
GSIB Sortino Ratio Rank: 88
GSIB Omega Ratio Rank: 86
GSIB Calmar Ratio Rank: 86
GSIB Martin Ratio Rank: 82

FNGS

FNGS Risk / Return Rank: 41
FNGS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 43
FNGS Sortino Ratio Rank: 51
FNGS Omega Ratio Rank: 45
FNGS Calmar Ratio Rank: 36
FNGS Martin Ratio Rank: 32

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.

GSIB vs. FNGS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Themes Global Systemically Important Banks ETF (GSIB) 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.

	GSIB	FNGS	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	1.79	0.73	+1.05
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	2.39	1.26	+1.13
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.34	1.17	+0.17
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.51	0.84	+1.67
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	8.62	2.59	+6.04
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

GSIB vs. FNGS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current GSIB Sharpe Ratio is 1.79, which is higher than the FNGS Sharpe Ratio of 0.73. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of GSIB and FNGS, offering insights into how both investments have performed under varying market conditions. These values are calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	GSIB	FNGS	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.79	0.73	+1.05
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.53	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	2.15	0.90	+1.25

Correlation

The correlation between GSIB and FNGS is 0.41, which is considered to be moderate. This suggests that the two assets have some degree of positive relationship in their price movements. Moderate correlation can be acceptable for portfolio diversification, offering a balance between risk and potential returns.

Dividends

GSIB vs. FNGS - Dividend Comparison

GSIB's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.97%, while FNGS has not paid dividends to shareholders.

	TTM	2025	2024
GSIB Themes Global Systemically Important Banks ETF	1.97%	1.91%	1.67%
FNGS MicroSectors FANG+ ETN	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Drawdowns

GSIB vs. FNGS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GSIB drawdown since its inception was -17.71%, smaller than the maximum FNGS drawdown of -48.98%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GSIB and FNGS.

Drawdown Indicators

	GSIB	FNGS	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-17.71%	-48.98%	+31.27%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-14.59%	-22.93%	+8.34%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-48.98%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-9.87%	-19.32%	+9.45%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.06%	-11.02%	+8.96%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.25%	7.43%	-3.18%

Volatility

GSIB vs. FNGS - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Themes Global Systemically Important Banks ETF (GSIB) is 7.69%, while MicroSectors FANG+ ETN (FNGS) has a volatility of 8.31%. This indicates that GSIB experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FNGS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	GSIB	FNGS	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	7.69%	8.31%	-0.62%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	13.05%	15.68%	-2.63%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	20.79%	26.98%	-6.19%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	18.39%	29.97%	-11.58%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	18.39%	31.34%	-12.95%