PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
PHYL vs. FNGD
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

PHYL vs. FNGD - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in PGIM Active High Yield Bond ETF (PHYL) and MicroSectors FANG+™ Index -3X Inverse Leveraged ETN (FNGD). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, PHYL achieves a 1.60% return, which is significantly higher than FNGD's -27.13% return.


PHYL

1D
-0.01%
1M
0.35%
YTD
1.60%
6M
1.84%
1Y
6.59%
3Y*
9.30%
5Y*
4.00%
10Y*

FNGD

1D
7.44%
1M
2.40%
YTD
-27.13%
6M
-23.35%
1Y
-49.41%
3Y*
-65.49%
5Y*
-62.47%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

PHYL vs. FNGD - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024202320222021202020192018
PHYL
PGIM Active High Yield Bond ETF
1.60%9.65%8.45%11.91%-11.80%6.20%6.31%16.77%-4.17%
FNGD
MicroSectors FANG+™ Index -3X Inverse Leveraged ETN
-27.13%-61.42%-76.57%-90.14%52.21%-60.04%-95.60%-72.46%55.02%

Correlation

The correlation between PHYL and FNGD is -0.52, 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

-0.52

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

-0.48

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

-0.51

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 27, 2018

-0.52

The correlation between PHYL and FNGD has been stable across timeframes, ranging from -0.52 to -0.48 - 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

PHYL vs. FNGD — Risk / Return Rank

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

PHYL
PHYL Risk / Return Rank: 6464
Overall Rank
PHYL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6464
Sharpe Ratio Rank
PHYL Sortino Ratio Rank: 6868
Sortino Ratio Rank
PHYL Omega Ratio Rank: 7171
Omega Ratio Rank
PHYL Calmar Ratio Rank: 5454
Calmar Ratio Rank
PHYL Martin Ratio Rank: 6666
Martin Ratio Rank

FNGD
FNGD Risk / Return Rank: 33
Overall Rank
FNGD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 33
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FNGD Sortino Ratio Rank: 33
Sortino Ratio Rank
FNGD Omega Ratio Rank: 33
Omega Ratio Rank
FNGD Calmar Ratio Rank: 33
Calmar Ratio Rank
FNGD Martin Ratio Rank: 11
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

PHYL vs. FNGD - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for PGIM Active High Yield Bond ETF (PHYL) and MicroSectors FANG+™ Index -3X Inverse Leveraged ETN (FNGD). 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.


PHYLFNGDDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+2.74

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+3.93

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.40

0.89

+0.51

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.47

-0.75

+3.22

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

11.23

-1.52

+12.75

PHYL vs. FNGD - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current PHYL Sharpe Ratio is 1.98, which is higher than the FNGD Sharpe Ratio of -0.76. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of PHYL and FNGD, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Drawdowns

PHYL vs. FNGD - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PHYL drawdown since its inception was -22.07%, smaller than the maximum FNGD drawdown of -100.00%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PHYL and FNGD.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


PHYLFNGDDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-22.07%

-100.00%

+77.93%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-2.68%

-65.92%

+63.24%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-4.53%

-97.35%

+92.82%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-16.11%

-99.67%

+83.56%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.30%

-100.00%

+99.70%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-3.05%

-87.30%

+84.25%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

0.59%

34.15%

-33.56%

Volatility

PHYL vs. FNGD - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for PGIM Active High Yield Bond ETF (PHYL) is 1.06%, while MicroSectors FANG+™ Index -3X Inverse Leveraged ETN (FNGD) has a volatility of 33.07%. This indicates that PHYL experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FNGD based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


PHYLFNGDDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

1.06%

33.07%

-32.01%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

2.72%

53.22%

-50.50%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

3.35%

65.50%

-62.15%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

5.70%

89.67%

-83.97%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

7.64%

91.30%

-83.66%

PHYL vs. FNGD - Expense Ratio Comparison

PHYL has a 0.53% expense ratio, which is lower than FNGD's 0.95% expense ratio.


Dividends

PHYL vs. FNGD - Dividend Comparison

PHYL's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 6.99%, while FNGD has not paid dividends to shareholders.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018
FNGD
MicroSectors FANG+™ Index -3X Inverse Leveraged ETN
0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
PHYL
PGIM Active High Yield Bond ETF
6.99%7.05%8.28%7.62%6.55%6.13%7.51%7.31%1.79%

Frequently Asked Questions


PHYL and FNGD have a correlation of -0.52, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

FNGD has higher volatility (33.07%) compared to PHYL (1.06%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PHYL dropped -22.07% vs FNGD's -100.00%.

On 5-year performance, PHYL leads with 4.00% vs -62.47% for FNGD. On fees, PHYL is cheaper at 0.53% per year. On volatility, PHYL has been the lower-risk option at 1.06%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 5-year period, PHYL has performed better with a 4.00% return vs -62.47%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

PHYL is cheaper with a 0.53% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for FNGD.

PHYL has the higher dividend yield at 6.99%, compared with 0.00% for FNGD.

PHYL is categorized as High Yield Bonds, while FNGD is Leveraged Equities. They also come from different issuers: Prudential and BMO. Their fees differ too: 0.53% for PHYL and 0.95% for FNGD.

PHYL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.98 vs -0.76), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for PHYL and FNGD

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