LGH vs. FNGS
Compare and contrast key facts about HCM Defender 500 Index ETF (LGH) and MicroSectors FANG+ ETN (FNGS).
LGH and FNGS are both exchange-traded funds (ETFs), meaning they are traded on stock exchanges and can be bought and sold throughout the day. LGH is a passively managed fund by Howard Capital Management that tracks the performance of the HCM Defender 500 Index. It was launched on Oct 10, 2019. FNGS is a passively managed fund by BMO Financial Group that tracks the performance of the NYSE FANG+ Index. It was launched on Nov 12, 2019. Both LGH and FNGS are passive ETFs, meaning that they are not actively managed but aim to replicate the performance of the underlying index as closely as possible.
Scroll down to visually compare performance, riskiness, drawdowns, and other indicators and decide which better suits your portfolio: LGH or FNGS.
Correlation
The correlation between LGH and FNGS is 0.79, which is considered to be high. That indicates a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Having highly-correlated positions in a portfolio may signal a lack of diversification, potentially leading to increased risk during market downturns.
Performance
LGH vs. FNGS - Performance Comparison
Loading data...
Key characteristics
LGH:
0.22
FNGS:
0.80
LGH:
0.46
FNGS:
1.22
LGH:
1.06
FNGS:
1.16
LGH:
0.27
FNGS:
0.91
LGH:
0.74
FNGS:
2.64
LGH:
6.71%
FNGS:
9.20%
LGH:
19.22%
FNGS:
32.13%
LGH:
-29.60%
FNGS:
-48.98%
LGH:
-12.43%
FNGS:
-10.48%
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, LGH achieves a -7.99% return, which is significantly lower than FNGS's -4.29% return.
LGH
-7.99%
5.76%
-10.32%
4.01%
15.80%
N/A
FNGS
-4.29%
12.11%
2.01%
24.86%
27.66%
N/A
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
LGH vs. FNGS - Expense Ratio Comparison
LGH has a 1.23% expense ratio, which is higher than FNGS's 0.58% expense ratio.
Risk-Adjusted Performance
LGH vs. FNGS — Risk-Adjusted Performance Rank
LGH
FNGS
LGH vs. FNGS - Risk-Adjusted Performance Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for HCM Defender 500 Index ETF (LGH) 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.
Loading data...
Dividends
LGH vs. FNGS - Dividend Comparison
LGH's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.43%, while FNGS has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| TTM | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
LGH HCM Defender 500 Index ETF | 0.43% | 0.40% | 0.63% | 0.61% | 0.14% | 0.23% | 0.17% |
FNGS MicroSectors FANG+ ETN | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Drawdowns
LGH vs. FNGS - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum LGH drawdown since its inception was -29.60%, smaller than the maximum FNGS drawdown of -48.98%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LGH and FNGS. For additional features, visit the drawdowns tool.
Loading data...
Volatility
LGH vs. FNGS - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for HCM Defender 500 Index ETF (LGH) is 5.58%, while MicroSectors FANG+ ETN (FNGS) has a volatility of 10.27%. This indicates that LGH 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.
Loading data...