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

Performance

PHYL vs. FNGU - 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+ 3X Leveraged ETNs (FNGU). 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 1.43% return, which is significantly lower than FNGU's 5.54% return.


PHYL

1D
-0.06%
1M
-0.59%
6M
0.81%
YTD
1.43%
1Y
4.95%
3Y*
8.48%
5Y*
3.85%
10Y*
ALL TIME*
5.34%

FNGU

1D
5.13%
1M
0.64%
6M
18.28%
YTD
5.54%
1Y
13.50%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
ALL TIME*
5.98%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Liquidity Comparison


PositionAvg. Volume Value (2W)Avg. Volume Value (1M)Avg. Volume Value (3M)
$92.08M$119.18M$153.90M
$11.83M$9.14M$6.26M

PHYL vs. FNGU - Yearly Performance Comparison


Correlation

The correlation between PHYL and FNGU is 0.53, which is moderate. They have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently, sharing some price drivers without tracking each other closely.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.

0.53

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 20, 2025

0.55

The correlation between PHYL and FNGU has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.53 to 0.55 - 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. FNGU — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks 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: 6767
Sortino Ratio Rank
PHYL Omega Ratio Rank: 6767
Omega Ratio Rank
PHYL Calmar Ratio Rank: 5252
Calmar Ratio Rank
PHYL Martin Ratio Rank: 6868
Martin Ratio Rank

FNGU
FNGU Risk / Return Rank: 1414
Overall Rank
FNGU Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1212
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FNGU Sortino Ratio Rank: 1717
Sortino Ratio Rank
FNGU Omega Ratio Rank: 1717
Omega Ratio Rank
FNGU Calmar Ratio Rank: 1212
Calmar Ratio Rank
FNGU Martin Ratio Rank: 1212
Martin Ratio Rank
The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

PHYL vs. FNGU - 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+ 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.


PHYLFNGUDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+1.41

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+1.63

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.28

1.07

+0.22

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.86

0.07

+1.79

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

8.21

0.16

+8.05

PHYL vs. FNGU - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current PHYL Sharpe Ratio is 1.48, which is higher than the FNGU Sharpe Ratio of 0.07. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of PHYL 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.


Loading charts...

Drawdowns

PHYL vs. FNGU - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PHYL drawdown since its inception was -22.07%, smaller than the maximum FNGU drawdown of -61.30%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PHYL and FNGU.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


PHYLFNGUDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-22.07%

-61.30%

+39.23%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-2.68%

-59.55%

+56.87%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-4.53%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-16.11%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.74%

-26.25%

+25.51%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-3.01%

-22.61%

+19.60%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

0.61%

26.68%

-26.07%

Volatility

PHYL vs. FNGU - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for PGIM Active High Yield Bond ETF (PHYL) is 0.87%, while MicroSectors FANG+ 3X Leveraged ETNs (FNGU) has a volatility of 17.87%. This indicates that PHYL 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.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


PHYLFNGUDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

0.87%

17.87%

-17.00%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

2.82%

53.81%

-50.99%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

3.38%

65.86%

-62.48%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

5.70%

79.67%

-73.97%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

7.59%

79.67%

-72.08%

PHYL vs. FNGU - Expense Ratio Comparison

PHYL has a 0.53% expense ratio, which is lower than FNGU's 2.60% expense ratio.


Dividends

PHYL vs. FNGU - Dividend Comparison

PHYL's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 7.63%, while FNGU has not paid dividends to shareholders.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018
FNGU
MicroSectors FANG+ 3X Leveraged ETNs
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
7.01%7.05%8.28%7.62%6.55%6.13%7.51%7.31%1.79%

Frequently Asked Questions


PHYL and FNGU have a correlation of 0.53, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

FNGU has higher volatility (17.87%) compared to PHYL (0.87%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PHYL dropped -22.07% vs FNGU's -61.30%.

On 1-year performance, FNGU leads with 13.50% vs 4.95% for PHYL. On fees, PHYL is cheaper at 0.53% per year. On volatility, PHYL has been the lower-risk option at 0.87%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, FNGU has performed better with a 13.50% return vs 4.95%. 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 2.60% for FNGU.

PHYL has the higher dividend yield at 7.01%, compared with 0.00% for FNGU.

PHYL is categorized as High Yield Bonds, while FNGU is Leveraged Equities. They also come from different issuers: PGIM and BMO. Their fees differ too: 0.53% for PHYL and 2.60% for FNGU.

PHYL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.48 vs 0.07), 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 FNGU

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