IWY vs. FNGO
IWY (iShares Russell Top 200 Growth ETF) and FNGO (MicroSectors FANG+ Index 2X Leveraged ETN) are both exchange-traded funds - IWY is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund tracking the Russell Top 200 Growth Index, while FNGO is a Leveraged Equities fund tracking the NYSE FANG+ Index (+200%). Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, IWY returned 15.15%/yr vs 25.62%/yr for FNGO. Their correlation of 0.86 suggests significant overlap in exposure. IWY charges 0.20%/yr vs 0.95%/yr for FNGO.
Performance
IWY vs. FNGO - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, IWY achieves a 2.99% return, which is significantly lower than FNGO's 8.91% return.
IWY
- 1D
- -0.00%
- 1M
- -2.39%
- YTD
- 2.99%
- 6M
- 3.75%
- 1Y
- 19.83%
- 3Y*
- 23.03%
- 5Y*
- 15.15%
- 10Y*
- 19.24%
FNGO
- 1D
- -1.60%
- 1M
- -7.03%
- YTD
- 8.91%
- 6M
- 3.86%
- 1Y
- 26.54%
- 3Y*
- 49.78%
- 5Y*
- 25.62%
- 10Y*
- —
IWY vs. FNGO - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
IWY iShares Russell Top 200 Growth ETF | 2.99% | 18.19% | 34.89% | 46.49% | -29.91% | 31.05% | 39.01% | 36.20% | -10.72% |
FNGO MicroSectors FANG+ Index 2X Leveraged ETN | 8.91% | 25.49% | 101.65% | 240.10% | -71.55% | 28.38% | 238.00% | 79.61% | -39.85% |
Correlation
The correlation between IWY and FNGO is 0.89, 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 | 0.89 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.91 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.90 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 2, 2018 | 0.86 |
The correlation between IWY and FNGO has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.86 to 0.91 - a consistent structural relationship.
IWY vs. FNGO - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
IWY
FNGO
Technology
Communication Services
Consumer Cyclical
Healthcare
-
Financial Services
Industrials
-
Consumer Defensive
-
Utilities
-
Real Estate
-
Basic Materials
-
Energy
-
Technology
IWY
FNGO
Communication Services
IWY
FNGO
Consumer Cyclical
IWY
FNGO
Healthcare
IWY
FNGO
-
Financial Services
IWY
FNGO
Industrials
IWY
FNGO
-
Consumer Defensive
IWY
FNGO
-
Utilities
IWY
FNGO
-
Real Estate
IWY
FNGO
-
Basic Materials
IWY
FNGO
-
Energy
IWY
FNGO
-
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
Return for Risk
IWY vs. FNGO — Risk / Return Rank
IWY
FNGO
IWY vs. FNGO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Russell Top 200 Growth ETF (IWY) and MicroSectors FANG+ Index 2X Leveraged ETN (FNGO). 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.
| IWY | FNGO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.61 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.63 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.22 | 1.13 | +0.09 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.20 | 0.62 | +0.57 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 3.85 | 1.62 | +2.23 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
IWY vs. FNGO - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum IWY drawdown since its inception was -32.68%, smaller than the maximum FNGO drawdown of -78.39%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IWY and FNGO.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| IWY | FNGO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -32.68% | -78.39% | +45.71% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -16.63% | -42.73% | +26.10% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -23.22% | -47.64% | +24.42% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -32.68% | -78.39% | +45.71% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -32.68% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -5.68% | -18.46% | +12.78% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -4.75% | -23.87% | +19.12% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 5.16% | 16.45% | -11.29% |
Volatility
IWY vs. FNGO - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for iShares Russell Top 200 Growth ETF (IWY) is 5.30%, while MicroSectors FANG+ Index 2X Leveraged ETN (FNGO) has a volatility of 17.58%. This indicates that IWY experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FNGO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| IWY | FNGO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 5.30% | 17.58% | -12.28% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 12.38% | 33.63% | -21.25% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 16.01% | 41.88% | -25.87% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 21.54% | 60.50% | -38.96% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 21.01% | 61.61% | -40.60% |
IWY vs. FNGO - Expense Ratio Comparison
IWY has a 0.20% expense ratio, which is lower than FNGO's 0.95% expense ratio.
Dividends
IWY vs. FNGO - Dividend Comparison
IWY's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.34%, while FNGO has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FNGO MicroSectors FANG+ Index 2X Leveraged ETN | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
IWY iShares Russell Top 200 Growth ETF | 0.34% | 0.36% | 0.42% | 0.68% | 0.88% | 0.50% | 0.71% | 1.06% | 1.32% | 1.26% | 1.51% | 1.58% |
Frequently Asked Questions
IWY and FNGO have a correlation of 0.89, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
FNGO has higher volatility (17.58%) compared to IWY (5.30%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IWY dropped -32.68% vs FNGO's -78.39%.
On 5-year performance, FNGO leads with 25.62% vs 15.15% for IWY. On fees, IWY is cheaper at 0.20% per year. On volatility, IWY has been the lower-risk option at 5.30%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 5-year period, FNGO has performed better with a 25.62% return vs 15.15%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
IWY is cheaper with a 0.20% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for FNGO.
IWY has the higher dividend yield at 0.34%, compared with 0.00% for FNGO.
IWY is categorized as Large Cap Growth Equities, while FNGO is Leveraged Equities. IWY tracks Russell Top 200 Growth Index, while FNGO tracks NYSE FANG+ Index (+200%). They also come from different issuers: iShares and Bank of Montreal. Their fees differ too: 0.20% for IWY and 0.95% for FNGO.
IWY currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.24 vs 0.64), 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.
Find the right allocation for IWY and FNGO
Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.
Open Portfolio Optimizer