NRGU vs. FNGS

Last updated Apr 2, 2026

Compare and contrast key facts about MicroSectors U.S. Big Oil Index 3X Leveraged ETN (NRGU) and MicroSectors FANG+ ETN (FNGS).

NRGU and FNGS are both exchange-traded funds (ETFs), meaning they are traded on stock exchanges and can be bought and sold throughout the day. NRGU is a passively managed fund by BMO that tracks the performance of the Solactive MicroSectors U.S. Big Oil Index (-300%). It was launched on Apr 9, 2019. FNGS is a passively managed fund by BMO that tracks the performance of the NYSE FANG+ Index. It was launched on Nov 12, 2019. Both NRGU and FNGS are passive ETFs, meaning that they are not actively managed but aim to replicate the performance of the underlying index as closely as possible.

Performance

NRGU vs. FNGS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in MicroSectors U.S. Big Oil Index 3X Leveraged ETN (NRGU) and MicroSectors FANG+ ETN (FNGS). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

NRGU vs. FNGS - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
NRGU MicroSectors U.S. Big Oil Index 3X Leveraged ETN	139.49%	-33.00%
FNGS MicroSectors FANG+ ETN	-10.61%	13.28%

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, NRGU achieves a 139.49% return, which is significantly higher than FNGS's -10.61% return.

NRGU

• 1D: -10.75%
• 1M: 24.81%
• YTD: 139.49%
• 6M: 107.68%
• 1Y: 69.15%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

FNGS

• 1D: 2.05%
• 1M: -3.29%
• YTD: -10.61%
• 6M: -12.74%
• 1Y: 20.77%
• 3Y*: 31.31%
• 5Y*: 16.15%
• 10Y*: —

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

NRGU vs. FNGS - Expense Ratio Comparison

NRGU has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is higher than FNGS's 0.58% expense ratio.

NRGU

MicroSectors U.S. Big Oil Index 3X Leveraged ETN

FNGS

MicroSectors FANG+ ETN

Return for Risk

NRGU vs. FNGS — Risk / Return Rank

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

NRGU

NRGU Risk / Return Rank: 45
NRGU Sharpe Ratio Rank: 40
NRGU Sortino Ratio Rank: 54
NRGU Omega Ratio Rank: 54
NRGU Calmar Ratio Rank: 47
NRGU Martin Ratio Rank: 30

FNGS

FNGS Risk / Return Rank: 39
FNGS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 39
FNGS Sortino Ratio Rank: 46
FNGS Omega Ratio Rank: 42
FNGS Calmar Ratio Rank: 36
FNGS Martin Ratio Rank: 32

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.

NRGU vs. FNGS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for MicroSectors U.S. Big Oil Index 3X Leveraged ETN (NRGU) 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.

	NRGU	FNGS	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	0.79	0.77	+0.02
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	1.48	1.32	+0.17
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.21	1.17	+0.04
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.29	0.96	+0.33
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	2.64	2.94	-0.30
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

NRGU vs. FNGS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current NRGU Sharpe Ratio is 0.79, which is comparable to the FNGS Sharpe Ratio of 0.77. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of NRGU and FNGS, offering insights into how both investments have performed under varying market conditions. These values are calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	NRGU	FNGS	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.79	0.77	+0.02
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.54	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.61	0.91	-0.30

Correlation

The correlation between NRGU and FNGS is 0.06, which is considered to be low. This implies their price changes are not closely related. A low correlation is generally favorable for portfolio diversification, as it helps to reduce overall risk by spreading it across multiple assets with different performance patterns.

Dividends

NRGU vs. FNGS - Dividend Comparison

Neither NRGU nor FNGS has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Drawdowns

NRGU vs. FNGS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum NRGU drawdown since its inception was -57.50%, which is greater than FNGS's maximum drawdown of -48.98%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for NRGU and FNGS.

Drawdown Indicators

	NRGU	FNGS	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-57.50%	-48.98%	-8.52%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-55.24%	-22.93%	-32.31%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-48.98%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-17.40%	-17.66%	+0.26%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-25.38%	-11.02%	-14.36%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	27.12%	7.52%	+19.60%

Volatility

NRGU vs. FNGS - Volatility Comparison

MicroSectors U.S. Big Oil Index 3X Leveraged ETN (NRGU) has a higher volatility of 23.31% compared to MicroSectors FANG+ ETN (FNGS) at 8.61%. This indicates that NRGU's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FNGS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	NRGU	FNGS	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	23.31%	8.61%	+14.70%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	50.27%	15.82%	+34.45%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	88.18%	27.04%	+61.14%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	87.12%	29.98%	+57.14%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	87.12%	31.34%	+55.78%