MAGY vs. FNGO

Last updated Aug 2, 2026

MAGY (Roundhill Magnificent Seven Covered Call ETF) and FNGO (MicroSectors FANG+ Index 2X Leveraged ETN) are both exchange-traded funds - MAGY is a Derivative Income fund actively managed by Roundhill, while FNGO is a Leveraged Equities fund tracking the NYSE FANG+ Index (+200%). MAGY is actively managed, while FNGO is passively managed. Over the past year, MAGY returned 1.42% vs 21.80% for FNGO. Their 0.76 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. MAGY charges 0.99%/yr vs 0.95%/yr for FNGO.

Performance

MAGY vs. FNGO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Roundhill Magnificent Seven Covered Call ETF (MAGY) and MicroSectors FANG+ Index 2X Leveraged ETN (FNGO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, MAGY achieves a -6.83% return, which is significantly lower than FNGO's 12.30% return.

MAGY

• 1D: 2.29%
• 1M: 0.52%
• 6M: -7.69%
• YTD: -6.83%
• 1Y: 1.42%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 13.75%

FNGO

• 1D: 3.64%
• 1M: 1.33%
• 6M: 20.30%
• YTD: 12.30%
• 1Y: 21.80%
• 3Y*: 47.42%
• 5Y*: 23.80%
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 37.68%

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
FNGO MicroSectors FANG+ Index 2X Leveraged ETN	$408.43K	$444.96K	$770.86K
MAGY Roundhill Magnificent Seven Covered Call ETF	$1.76M	$2.00M	$2.81M

MAGY vs. FNGO - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
MAGY Roundhill Magnificent Seven Covered Call ETF	-6.83%	26.42%
FNGO MicroSectors FANG+ Index 2X Leveraged ETN	12.30%	88.15%

Correlation

The correlation between MAGY and FNGO is 0.81, meaning they have usually moved in the same direction, including during past declines.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.81
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 23, 2025	0.76

The correlation between MAGY and FNGO has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.76 to 0.81 - a consistent structural relationship.

MAGY vs. FNGO - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	MAGY	FNGO
Financial Services	100.0%	10.0%
Basic Materials	-	-
Communication Services	-	30.0%
Consumer Cyclical	-	10.4%
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Energy	-	-
Healthcare	-	-
Industrials	-	-
Real Estate	-	-
Technology	-	59.6%
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

MAGY vs. FNGO — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

MAGY

MAGY Risk / Return Rank: 10
MAGY Sharpe Ratio Rank: 10
MAGY Sortino Ratio Rank: 10
MAGY Omega Ratio Rank: 10
MAGY Calmar Ratio Rank: 10
MAGY Martin Ratio Rank: 10

FNGO

FNGO Risk / Return Rank: 19
FNGO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 19
FNGO Sortino Ratio Rank: 22
FNGO Omega Ratio Rank: 21
FNGO Calmar Ratio Rank: 17
FNGO Martin Ratio Rank: 17

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

MAGY vs. FNGO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

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

	MAGY	FNGO	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.05	0.36	-0.41
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.04	0.80	-0.76
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.01	1.09	-0.09
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.06	0.38	-0.44
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-0.16	0.92	-1.08

MAGY vs. FNGO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MAGY Sharpe Ratio is -0.05, which is lower than the FNGO Sharpe Ratio of 0.36. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MAGY and FNGO, 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

MAGY vs. FNGO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MAGY drawdown since its inception was -14.29%, smaller than the maximum FNGO drawdown of -78.39%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MAGY and FNGO.

Drawdown Indicators

	MAGY	FNGO	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-14.29%	-78.39%	+64.10%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-14.29%	-42.73%	+28.44%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-47.64%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-78.39%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-8.86%	-15.91%	+7.05%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.41%	-23.75%	+20.34%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	5.53%	17.55%	-12.02%

Volatility

MAGY vs. FNGO - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Roundhill Magnificent Seven Covered Call ETF (MAGY) is 6.83%, while MicroSectors FANG+ Index 2X Leveraged ETN (FNGO) has a volatility of 12.24%. This indicates that MAGY 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.

Volatility by Period

	MAGY	FNGO	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.83%	12.24%	-5.41%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	14.10%	36.19%	-22.09%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	16.87%	44.77%	-27.90%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	16.18%	60.86%	-44.68%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	16.18%	61.47%	-45.29%

MAGY vs. FNGO - Expense Ratio Comparison

MAGY has a 0.99% expense ratio, which is higher than FNGO's 0.95% expense ratio.

Dividends

MAGY vs. FNGO - Dividend Comparison

MAGY's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 39.90%, while FNGO has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025
FNGO MicroSectors FANG+ Index 2X Leveraged ETN	0.00%	0.00%
MAGY Roundhill Magnificent Seven Covered Call ETF	38.99%	23.38%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both MAGY and FNGO in my portfolio?

MAGY and FNGO 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, MAGY or FNGO?

FNGO has higher volatility (12.24%) compared to MAGY (6.83%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MAGY dropped -14.29% vs FNGO's -78.39%.

Which ETF is better, MAGY or FNGO?

On 1-year performance, FNGO leads with 21.80% vs 1.42% for MAGY. On fees, FNGO is cheaper at 0.95% per year. On volatility, MAGY has been the lower-risk option at 6.83%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, MAGY or FNGO?

Over the 1-year period, FNGO has performed better with a 21.80% return vs 1.42%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, MAGY or FNGO?

FNGO is cheaper with a 0.95% expense ratio, compared with 0.99% for MAGY.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, MAGY or FNGO?

MAGY has the higher dividend yield at 38.99%, compared with 0.00% for FNGO.

What is the main difference between MAGY and FNGO?

MAGY is categorized as Derivative Income, while FNGO is Leveraged Equities. They also come from different issuers: Roundhill and BMO. Their fees differ too: 0.99% for MAGY and 0.95% for FNGO.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FNGO currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.36 vs -0.05), 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.