MAGS vs. FNGS

Last updated Jun 23, 2026

MAGS (Roundhill Magnificent Seven ETF) and FNGS (MicroSectors FANG+ ETN) are both exchange-traded funds - MAGS is a Technology Equities fund actively managed by Roundhill, while FNGS is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund tracking the NYSE FANG+ Index. MAGS is actively managed, while FNGS is passively managed. Over the past 3 years, MAGS returned 29.80%/yr vs 30.34%/yr for FNGS. Their correlation of 0.88 suggests significant overlap in exposure. MAGS charges 0.29%/yr vs 0.58%/yr for FNGS.

Performance

MAGS vs. FNGS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Roundhill Magnificent Seven ETF (MAGS) and MicroSectors FANG+ ETN (FNGS). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, MAGS achieves a -2.94% return, which is significantly lower than FNGS's 8.21% return.

MAGS

• 1D: -2.17%
• 1M: -7.70%
• YTD: -2.94%
• 6M: -3.75%
• 1Y: 22.89%
• 3Y*: 29.80%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

FNGS

• 1D: -3.05%
• 1M: -1.23%
• YTD: 8.21%
• 6M: 7.55%
• 1Y: 20.76%
• 3Y*: 30.34%
• 5Y*: 18.98%
• 10Y*: —

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

MAGS vs. FNGS - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
MAGS Roundhill Magnificent Seven ETF	-2.94%	22.99%	63.97%	35.74%
FNGS MicroSectors FANG+ ETN	8.21%	18.64%	51.99%	43.35%

Correlation

The correlation between MAGS and FNGS is 0.81, 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	0.81
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.88
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 11, 2023	0.88

The correlation between MAGS and FNGS has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.81 to 0.88 - a consistent structural relationship.

MAGS vs. FNGS - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	MAGS	FNGS
Technology	8.1%	63.4%
Consumer Cyclical	5.3%	10.6%
Communication Services	4.0%	26.0%
Basic Materials	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Energy	-	-
Financial Services	-	10.0%
Healthcare	-	-
Industrials	-	-
Real Estate	-	-
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

MAGS vs. FNGS — Risk / Return Rank

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

MAGS

MAGS Risk / Return Rank: 29
MAGS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 32
MAGS Sortino Ratio Rank: 30
MAGS Omega Ratio Rank: 30
MAGS Calmar Ratio Rank: 26
MAGS Martin Ratio Rank: 30

FNGS

FNGS Risk / Return Rank: 24
FNGS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 27
FNGS Sortino Ratio Rank: 26
FNGS Omega Ratio Rank: 25
FNGS Calmar Ratio Rank: 20
FNGS Martin Ratio Rank: 21

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.

MAGS vs. FNGS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Roundhill Magnificent Seven ETF (MAGS) 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.

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.

	MAGS	FNGS	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.11	0.93	+0.18
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.58	1.38	+0.20
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.20	1.17	+0.02
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.24	0.91	+0.33
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	4.09	2.56	+1.52

MAGS vs. FNGS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MAGS Sharpe Ratio is 1.11, which is comparable to the FNGS Sharpe Ratio of 0.93. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MAGS and FNGS, 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

MAGS vs. FNGS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MAGS drawdown since its inception was -29.91%, smaller than the maximum FNGS drawdown of -48.98%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MAGS and FNGS.

Drawdown Indicators

	MAGS	FNGS	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-29.91%	-48.98%	+19.07%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-18.62%	-22.93%	+4.31%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-29.91%	-26.77%	-3.14%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-48.98%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-9.75%	-8.42%	-1.33%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-4.74%	-10.84%	+6.10%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	5.61%	8.11%	-2.50%

Volatility

MAGS vs. FNGS - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Roundhill Magnificent Seven ETF (MAGS) is 7.08%, while MicroSectors FANG+ ETN (FNGS) has a volatility of 10.75%. This indicates that MAGS 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

	MAGS	FNGS	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	7.08%	10.75%	-3.67%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	15.57%	17.87%	-2.30%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	20.73%	22.54%	-1.81%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	26.02%	30.24%	-4.22%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	26.02%	31.23%	-5.21%

MAGS vs. FNGS - Expense Ratio Comparison

MAGS has a 0.29% expense ratio, which is lower than FNGS's 0.58% expense ratio.

Dividends

MAGS vs. FNGS - Dividend Comparison

MAGS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.52%, while FNGS has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023
FNGS MicroSectors FANG+ ETN	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
MAGS Roundhill Magnificent Seven ETF	1.52%	1.48%	0.81%	0.44%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both MAGS and FNGS in my portfolio?

MAGS and FNGS have a correlation of 0.81, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, MAGS or FNGS?

FNGS has higher volatility (10.75%) compared to MAGS (7.08%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MAGS dropped -29.91% vs FNGS's -48.98%.

Which ETF is better, MAGS or FNGS?

On 3-year performance, FNGS leads with 30.34% vs 29.80% for MAGS. On fees, MAGS is cheaper at 0.29% per year. On volatility, MAGS has been the lower-risk option at 7.08%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, MAGS or FNGS?

Over the 3-year period, FNGS has performed better with a 30.34% return vs 29.80%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, MAGS or FNGS?

MAGS is cheaper with a 0.29% expense ratio, compared with 0.58% for FNGS.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, MAGS or FNGS?

MAGS has the higher dividend yield at 1.52%, compared with 0.00% for FNGS.

What is the main difference between MAGS and FNGS?

MAGS is categorized as Technology Equities, while FNGS is Large Cap Growth Equities. They also come from different issuers: Roundhill and BMO. Their fees differ too: 0.29% for MAGS and 0.58% for FNGS.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

MAGS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.11 vs 0.93), 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.