NQ=F vs. FNGS
NQ=F (E-Mini Nasdaq 100 Futures) is an asset, while FNGS (MicroSectors FANG+ ETN) is Large Cap Growth Equities fund tracking the NYSE FANG+ Index. Over the past 5 years, NQ=F returned 14.37%/yr vs 20.46%/yr for FNGS. Their correlation of 0.88 means they have usually moved in the same direction.
Performance
NQ=F vs. FNGS - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
The year-to-date returns for both investments are quite close, with NQ=F having a 16.06% return and FNGS slightly higher at 16.83%.
NQ=F
- 1D
- -1.07%
- 1M
- -1.32%
- 6M
- 18.18%
- YTD
- 16.06%
- 1Y
- 27.72%
- 3Y*
- 24.38%
- 5Y*
- 14.37%
- 10Y*
- 19.97%
- ALL TIME*
- 8.34%
FNGS
- 1D
- -0.29%
- 1M
- 6.83%
- 6M
- 24.47%
- YTD
- 16.83%
- 1Y
- 23.22%
- 3Y*
- 32.88%
- 5Y*
- 20.46%
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- 31.73%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $1.97M | $1.99M | $2.48M | |
| $16.70B | $15.74B | $17.43B |
NQ=F vs. FNGS - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
NQ=F E-Mini Nasdaq 100 Futures | 16.06% | 19.93% | 24.69% | 54.45% | -32.46% | 26.66% | 47.22% | 5.77% |
FNGS MicroSectors FANG+ ETN | 16.83% | 18.64% | 51.99% | 95.24% | -40.32% | 16.96% | 101.99% | 10.10% |
Correlation
The correlation between NQ=F and FNGS is 0.82, 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. | 0.82 |
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history. | 0.87 |
Correlation (5Y) Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period. | 0.89 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 13, 2019 | 0.88 |
The correlation between NQ=F and FNGS has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.82 to 0.89 - a consistent structural relationship.
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
Return for Risk
NQ=F vs. FNGS — Risk / Return Rank
NQ=F
FNGS
NQ=F vs. FNGS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for E-Mini Nasdaq 100 Futures (NQ=F) 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.
| NQ=F | FNGS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.42 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.49 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.25 | 1.19 | +0.07 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.34 | 1.02 | +1.33 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 7.29 | 2.70 | +4.59 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
NQ=F vs. FNGS - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum NQ=F drawdown since its inception was -78.99%, which is greater than FNGS's maximum drawdown of -48.98%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for NQ=F and FNGS.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| NQ=F | FNGS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -78.99% | -48.98% | -30.01% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -11.89% | -22.93% | +11.04% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -22.50% | -26.77% | +4.27% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -35.28% | -48.98% | +13.70% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -35.28% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -3.80% | -1.13% | -2.67% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -29.46% | -10.78% | -18.68% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.81% | 8.61% | -4.80% |
Volatility
NQ=F vs. FNGS - Volatility Comparison
E-Mini Nasdaq 100 Futures (NQ=F) and MicroSectors FANG+ ETN (FNGS) have volatilities of 7.41% and 7.68%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| NQ=F | FNGS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 7.41% | 7.68% | -0.27% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 15.98% | 18.93% | -2.95% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 19.42% | 23.12% | -3.70% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 23.17% | 30.38% | -7.21% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 22.63% | 31.11% | -8.48% |
Frequently Asked Questions
NQ=F and FNGS have a correlation of 0.82, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
FNGS has higher volatility (7.68%) compared to NQ=F (7.41%). In terms of maximum drawdown, NQ=F dropped -78.99% vs FNGS's -48.98%.
NQ=F currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.44 vs 1.01), 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.
Find the right allocation for NQ=F and FNGS
Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.
Open Portfolio Optimizer