MLPR vs. FNGU

Last updated Jun 14, 2026

MLPR (ETRACS Quarterly Pay 1.5x Leveraged Alerian MLP Index ETN) and FNGU (MicroSectors FANG+ 3X Leveraged ETNs) are both Leveraged Equities funds - MLPR tracks the Alerian MLP Index (150%) while FNGU tracks the NYSE FANG+ Index (Gross Total Return) (300%). Both are passively managed. Over the past year, MLPR returned 28.38% vs 25.83% for FNGU. At a 0.09 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. MLPR charges 0.95%/yr vs 2.60%/yr for FNGU.

Performance

MLPR vs. FNGU - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in ETRACS Quarterly Pay 1.5x Leveraged Alerian MLP Index ETN (MLPR) and MicroSectors FANG+ 3X Leveraged ETNs (FNGU). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, MLPR achieves a 28.01% return, which is significantly higher than FNGU's 3.96% return.

MLPR

• 1D: -0.69%
• 1M: -6.34%
• YTD: 28.01%
• 6M: 26.25%
• 1Y: 28.38%
• 3Y*: 31.84%
• 5Y*: 24.73%
• 10Y*: —

FNGU

• 1D: -2.52%
• 1M: -9.35%
• YTD: 3.96%
• 6M: -3.67%
• 1Y: 25.83%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

MLPR vs. FNGU - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
MLPR ETRACS Quarterly Pay 1.5x Leveraged Alerian MLP Index ETN	28.01%	-7.20%
FNGU MicroSectors FANG+ 3X Leveraged ETNs	3.96%	3.02%

Correlation

The correlation between MLPR and FNGU is -0.11, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.11
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 20, 2025	0.09

The correlation between MLPR and FNGU shifts across timeframes, from -0.11 (1 year) to 0.09 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

MLPR vs. FNGU — Risk / Return Rank

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

MLPR

MLPR Risk / Return Rank: 43
MLPR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 44
MLPR Sortino Ratio Rank: 41
MLPR Omega Ratio Rank: 41
MLPR Calmar Ratio Rank: 46
MLPR Martin Ratio Rank: 43

FNGU

FNGU Risk / Return Rank: 16
FNGU Sharpe Ratio Rank: 15
FNGU Sortino Ratio Rank: 19
FNGU Omega Ratio Rank: 19
FNGU Calmar Ratio Rank: 14
FNGU Martin Ratio Rank: 14

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.

MLPR vs. FNGU - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ETRACS Quarterly Pay 1.5x Leveraged Alerian MLP Index ETN (MLPR) and MicroSectors FANG+ 3X Leveraged ETNs (FNGU). 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.

	MLPR	FNGU	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.36	0.35	+1.02
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.87	0.87	+1.00
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.24	1.11	+0.13
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.01	0.36	+1.65
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	6.27	0.85	+5.41

MLPR vs. FNGU - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MLPR Sharpe Ratio is 1.36, which is higher than the FNGU Sharpe Ratio of 0.35. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MLPR and FNGU, 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

MLPR vs. FNGU - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MLPR drawdown since its inception was -48.98%, smaller than the maximum FNGU drawdown of -61.30%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MLPR and FNGU.

Drawdown Indicators

	MLPR	FNGU	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-48.98%	-61.30%	+12.32%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-13.97%	-59.55%	+45.58%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-24.45%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-28.66%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-8.36%	-27.36%	+19.00%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-8.92%	-22.25%	+13.33%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.48%	24.91%	-20.43%

Volatility

MLPR vs. FNGU - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for ETRACS Quarterly Pay 1.5x Leveraged Alerian MLP Index ETN (MLPR) is 7.59%, while MicroSectors FANG+ 3X Leveraged ETNs (FNGU) has a volatility of 27.31%. This indicates that MLPR experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FNGU based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	MLPR	FNGU	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	7.59%	27.31%	-19.72%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	14.97%	50.15%	-35.18%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	20.55%	61.43%	-40.88%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	29.50%	79.93%	-50.43%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	33.71%	79.93%	-46.22%

MLPR vs. FNGU - Expense Ratio Comparison

MLPR has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is lower than FNGU's 2.60% expense ratio.

Dividends

MLPR vs. FNGU - Dividend Comparison

MLPR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 9.13%, while FNGU has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
FNGU MicroSectors FANG+ 3X Leveraged ETNs	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
MLPR ETRACS Quarterly Pay 1.5x Leveraged Alerian MLP Index ETN	9.13%	10.85%	9.57%	10.08%	7.49%	10.69%	4.21%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both MLPR and FNGU in my portfolio?

MLPR and FNGU have a correlation of -0.11, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, MLPR or FNGU?

FNGU has higher volatility (27.31%) compared to MLPR (7.59%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MLPR dropped -48.98% vs FNGU's -61.30%.

Which ETF is better, MLPR or FNGU?

On 1-year performance, MLPR leads with 28.38% vs 25.83% for FNGU. On fees, MLPR is cheaper at 0.95% per year. On volatility, MLPR has been the lower-risk option at 7.59%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, MLPR or FNGU?

Over the 1-year period, MLPR has performed better with a 28.38% return vs 25.83%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, MLPR or FNGU?

MLPR is cheaper with a 0.95% expense ratio, compared with 2.60% for FNGU.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, MLPR or FNGU?

MLPR has the higher dividend yield at 9.13%, compared with 0.00% for FNGU.

What is the main difference between MLPR and FNGU?

MLPR tracks Alerian MLP Index (150%), while FNGU tracks NYSE FANG+ Index (Gross Total Return) (300%). They also come from different issuers: UBS and Bank of Montreal. Their fees differ too: 0.95% for MLPR and 2.60% for FNGU.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

MLPR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.36 vs 0.35), 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.