MVV vs. FNGO

Last updated Jun 3, 2026

MVV (ProShares Ultra Midcap 400) and FNGO (MicroSectors FANG+ Index 2X Leveraged ETN) are both Leveraged Equities funds - MVV tracks the S&P MidCap 400 Index (200%) while FNGO tracks the NYSE FANG+ Index (+200%). Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, MVV returned 6.86%/yr vs 32.14%/yr for FNGO. A 0.56 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. Both charge a 0.95% expense ratio.

Performance

MVV vs. FNGO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in ProShares Ultra Midcap 400 (MVV) 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, MVV achieves a 26.09% return, which is significantly lower than FNGO's 32.76% return.

MVV

• 1D: 1.75%
• 1M: 6.05%
• YTD: 26.09%
• 6M: 27.71%
• 1Y: 48.71%
• 3Y*: 22.19%
• 5Y*: 6.86%
• 10Y*: 13.68%

FNGO

• 1D: -0.60%
• 1M: 27.22%
• YTD: 32.76%
• 6M: 18.02%
• 1Y: 60.81%
• 3Y*: 63.93%
• 5Y*: 32.14%
• 10Y*: —

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

MVV vs. FNGO - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018
MVV ProShares Ultra Midcap 400	26.09%	3.48%	17.75%	22.51%	-31.96%	48.57%	6.20%	49.50%	-31.24%
FNGO MicroSectors FANG+ Index 2X Leveraged ETN	32.76%	25.49%	101.65%	240.10%	-71.55%	28.38%	238.00%	79.61%	-40.52%

Correlation

The correlation between MVV and FNGO is 0.43, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.43
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.48
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.59
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 3, 2018	0.56

The correlation between MVV and FNGO shifts across timeframes, from 0.43 (1 year) to 0.59 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

MVV vs. FNGO - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	MVV	FNGO
Industrials	25.1%	-
Technology	15.8%	59.9%
Financial Services	14.3%	10.0%
Consumer Cyclical	10.6%	11.3%
Healthcare	8.7%	-
Real Estate	7.5%	-
Energy	5.5%	-
Basic Materials	4.8%	-
Consumer Defensive	3.7%	-
Utilities	3.1%	-
Communication Services	1.0%	28.8%

Return for Risk

MVV vs. FNGO — Risk / Return Rank

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

MVV

MVV Risk / Return Rank: 47
MVV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 44
MVV Sortino Ratio Rank: 44
MVV Omega Ratio Rank: 41
MVV Calmar Ratio Rank: 54
MVV Martin Ratio Rank: 54

FNGO

FNGO Risk / Return Rank: 37
FNGO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 44
FNGO Sortino Ratio Rank: 41
FNGO Omega Ratio Rank: 40
FNGO Calmar Ratio Rank: 30
FNGO Martin Ratio Rank: 28

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.

MVV vs. FNGO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ProShares Ultra Midcap 400 (MVV) 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.

	MVV	FNGO	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	1.57	1.55	+0.02
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	2.22	2.09	+0.13
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.27	1.26	+0.01
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.73	1.50	+1.23
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	9.38	3.96	+5.42
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

MVV vs. FNGO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MVV Sharpe Ratio is 1.57, which is comparable to the FNGO Sharpe Ratio of 1.55. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MVV 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.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	MVV	FNGO	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.57	1.55	+0.02
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.17	0.54	-0.36
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.32	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.26	0.68	-0.42

Drawdowns

MVV vs. FNGO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MVV drawdown since its inception was -85.54%, which is greater than FNGO's maximum drawdown of -78.39%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MVV and FNGO.

Drawdown Indicators

	MVV	FNGO	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-85.54%	-78.39%	-7.15%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-17.68%	-42.73%	+25.05%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-44.80%	-47.64%	+2.84%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-45.53%	-78.39%	+32.86%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-69.19%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	-0.60%	+0.60%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-20.55%	-23.92%	+3.37%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	5.14%	16.21%	-11.07%

Volatility

MVV vs. FNGO - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for ProShares Ultra Midcap 400 (MVV) is 8.69%, while MicroSectors FANG+ Index 2X Leveraged ETN (FNGO) has a volatility of 10.73%. This indicates that MVV 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

	MVV	FNGO	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	8.69%	10.73%	-2.04%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	22.69%	30.49%	-7.80%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	31.22%	39.52%	-8.30%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	39.64%	60.24%	-20.60%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	42.37%	61.54%	-19.17%

MVV vs. FNGO - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both MVV and FNGO have an expense ratio of 0.95%.

Dividends

MVV vs. FNGO - Dividend Comparison

MVV's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.67%, 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%
MVV ProShares Ultra Midcap 400	0.67%	0.77%	0.39%	0.77%	0.93%	0.16%	0.29%	0.62%	0.62%	0.21%	0.43%	0.17%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both MVV and FNGO in my portfolio?

MVV and FNGO have a correlation of 0.43, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, MVV or FNGO?

FNGO has higher volatility (10.73%) compared to MVV (8.69%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MVV dropped -85.54% vs FNGO's -78.39%.

Which ETF is better, MVV or FNGO?

On 5-year performance, FNGO leads with 32.14% vs 6.86% for MVV. Both ETFs have the same 0.95% expense ratio. On volatility, MVV has been the lower-risk option at 8.69%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, MVV or FNGO?

Over the 5-year period, FNGO has performed better with a 32.14% return vs 6.86%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, MVV or FNGO?

MVV and FNGO have the same expense ratio: 0.95% per year.

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

MVV has the higher dividend yield at 0.67%, compared with 0.00% for FNGO.

What is the main difference between MVV and FNGO?

MVV tracks S&P MidCap 400 Index (200%), while FNGO tracks NYSE FANG+ Index (+200%). They also come from different issuers: ProShares and Bank of Montreal.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

MVV currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.57 vs 1.55), 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.