IVW vs. FNGG

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

IVW (iShares S&P 500 Growth ETF) and FNGG (Direxion Daily NYSE FANG+ Bull 2X Shares) are both exchange-traded funds - IVW is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund tracking the S&P 500 Growth Index, while FNGG is a Leveraged Equities fund tracking the NYSE FANG+ Index (2x Leveraged). Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, IVW returned 25.36%/yr vs 48.04%/yr for FNGG. Their correlation of 0.89 suggests significant overlap in exposure. IVW charges 0.18%/yr vs 0.97%/yr for FNGG.

Performance

IVW vs. FNGG - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares S&P 500 Growth ETF (IVW) and Direxion Daily NYSE FANG+ Bull 2X Shares (FNGG). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, IVW achieves a 8.67% return, which is significantly higher than FNGG's 5.64% return.

IVW

• 1D: -2.32%
• 1M: -2.04%
• YTD: 8.67%
• 6M: 7.44%
• 1Y: 26.74%
• 3Y*: 25.36%
• 5Y*: 13.97%
• 10Y*: 17.93%

FNGG

• 1D: -4.89%
• 1M: -7.16%
• YTD: 5.64%
• 6M: 2.41%
• 1Y: 24.87%
• 3Y*: 48.04%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

IVW vs. FNGG - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
IVW iShares S&P 500 Growth ETF	8.67%	21.95%	35.82%	29.83%	-29.50%	12.42%
FNGG Direxion Daily NYSE FANG+ Bull 2X Shares	5.64%	27.21%	98.76%	204.23%	-87.15%	-4.05%

Correlation

The correlation between IVW and FNGG is 0.90, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.90
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.91
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 30, 2021	0.89

The correlation between IVW and FNGG has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.89 to 0.91 - a consistent structural relationship.

IVW vs. FNGG - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	IVW	FNGG
Technology	53.0%	64.5%
Communication Services	15.8%	25.2%
Financial Services	8.6%	-
Consumer Cyclical	8.4%	10.3%
Healthcare	5.7%	-
Industrials	5.3%	-
Utilities	1.2%	-
Consumer Defensive	1.0%	-
Real Estate	0.5%	-
Basic Materials	0.3%	-
Energy	0.1%	-

Return for Risk

IVW vs. FNGG — Risk / Return Rank

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

IVW

IVW Risk / Return Rank: 45
IVW Sharpe Ratio Rank: 47
IVW Sortino Ratio Rank: 44
IVW Omega Ratio Rank: 44
IVW Calmar Ratio Rank: 41
IVW Martin Ratio Rank: 48

FNGG

FNGG Risk / Return Rank: 18
FNGG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 18
FNGG Sortino Ratio Rank: 19
FNGG Omega Ratio Rank: 19
FNGG Calmar Ratio Rank: 15
FNGG Martin Ratio Rank: 16

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.

IVW vs. FNGG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares S&P 500 Growth ETF (IVW) and Direxion Daily NYSE FANG+ Bull 2X Shares (FNGG). 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.

	IVW	FNGG	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.58	0.57	+1.01
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.16	1.04	+1.12
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.28	1.13	+0.15
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.95	0.58	+1.37
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	7.75	1.50	+6.25

IVW vs. FNGG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IVW Sharpe Ratio is 1.58, which is higher than the FNGG Sharpe Ratio of 0.57. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IVW and FNGG, 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

IVW vs. FNGG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IVW drawdown since its inception was -57.33%, smaller than the maximum FNGG drawdown of -91.33%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IVW and FNGG.

Drawdown Indicators

	IVW	FNGG	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-57.33%	-91.33%	+34.00%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-13.75%	-43.01%	+29.26%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-22.15%	-47.03%	+24.88%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-32.72%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-32.72%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-5.48%	-21.87%	+16.39%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-17.59%	-55.56%	+37.97%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.46%	16.65%	-13.19%

Volatility

IVW vs. FNGG - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares S&P 500 Growth ETF (IVW) is 7.23%, while Direxion Daily NYSE FANG+ Bull 2X Shares (FNGG) has a volatility of 21.11%. This indicates that IVW experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FNGG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	IVW	FNGG	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	7.23%	21.11%	-13.88%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	13.82%	35.05%	-21.23%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	17.06%	43.67%	-26.61%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	21.35%	67.80%	-46.45%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	20.70%	67.80%	-47.10%

IVW vs. FNGG - Expense Ratio Comparison

IVW has a 0.18% expense ratio, which is lower than FNGG's 0.97% expense ratio.

Dividends

IVW vs. FNGG - Dividend Comparison

IVW's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.37%, less than FNGG's 11.22% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
FNGG Direxion Daily NYSE FANG+ Bull 2X Shares	11.22%	11.89%	0.79%	0.88%	0.00%	4.99%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
IVW iShares S&P 500 Growth ETF	0.37%	0.40%	0.43%	1.03%	0.92%	0.46%	0.82%	1.63%	1.28%	1.30%	1.51%	1.51%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both IVW and FNGG in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.90, IVW and FNGG move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

Which is riskier, IVW or FNGG?

FNGG has higher volatility (21.11%) compared to IVW (7.23%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IVW dropped -57.33% vs FNGG's -91.33%.

Which ETF is better, IVW or FNGG?

On 3-year performance, FNGG leads with 48.04% vs 25.36% for IVW. On fees, IVW is cheaper at 0.18% per year. On volatility, IVW has been the lower-risk option at 7.23%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, IVW or FNGG?

Over the 3-year period, FNGG has performed better with a 48.04% return vs 25.36%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, IVW or FNGG?

IVW is cheaper with a 0.18% expense ratio, compared with 0.97% for FNGG.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, IVW or FNGG?

FNGG has the higher dividend yield at 11.22%, compared with 0.37% for IVW.

What is the main difference between IVW and FNGG?

IVW is categorized as Large Cap Growth Equities, while FNGG is Leveraged Equities. IVW tracks S&P 500 Growth Index, while FNGG tracks NYSE FANG+ Index (2x Leveraged). They also come from different issuers: iShares and Direxion. Their fees differ too: 0.18% for IVW and 0.97% for FNGG.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

IVW currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.58 vs 0.57), 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.