PHYL vs. FNGU

Last updated Jun 23, 2026

PHYL (PGIM Active High Yield Bond ETF) and FNGU (MicroSectors FANG+ 3X Leveraged ETNs) are both exchange-traded funds - PHYL is a High Yield Bonds fund actively managed by Prudential, while FNGU is a Leveraged Equities fund tracking the NYSE FANG+ Index (Gross Total Return) (300%). PHYL is actively managed, while FNGU is passively managed. Over the past year, PHYL returned 6.79% vs 30.95% for FNGU. A 0.55 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. PHYL charges 0.53%/yr vs 2.60%/yr for FNGU.

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.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, PHYL achieves a 1.62% return, which is significantly lower than FNGU's 7.21% return.

PHYL

• 1D: -0.24%
• 1M: 0.36%
• YTD: 1.62%
• 6M: 1.94%
• 1Y: 6.79%
• 3Y*: 9.30%
• 5Y*: 4.00%
• 10Y*: —

FNGU

• 1D: -7.77%
• 1M: -5.74%
• YTD: 7.21%
• 6M: 4.80%
• 1Y: 30.95%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

PHYL vs. FNGU - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
PHYL PGIM Active High Yield Bond ETF	1.62%	7.55%
FNGU MicroSectors FANG+ 3X Leveraged ETNs	7.21%	3.02%

Correlation

The correlation between PHYL and FNGU is 0.52, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.52
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 0.52 to 0.55 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

PHYL vs. FNGU — Risk / Return Rank

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

PHYL

PHYL Risk / Return Rank: 65
PHYL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 64
PHYL Sortino Ratio Rank: 69
PHYL Omega Ratio Rank: 72
PHYL Calmar Ratio Rank: 53
PHYL Martin Ratio Rank: 65

FNGU

FNGU Risk / Return Rank: 17
FNGU Sharpe Ratio Rank: 16
FNGU Sortino Ratio Rank: 20
FNGU Omega Ratio Rank: 19
FNGU Calmar Ratio Rank: 14
FNGU Martin Ratio Rank: 14

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. 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.

	PHYL	FNGU	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.04	0.49	+1.55
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.02	1.06	+1.95
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.41	1.13	+0.28
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.55	0.52	+2.02
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	11.57	1.24	+10.34

PHYL vs. FNGU - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current PHYL Sharpe Ratio is 2.04, which is higher than the FNGU Sharpe Ratio of 0.49. 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.

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.

Drawdown Indicators

	PHYL	FNGU	Difference
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	-0.28%	-25.09%	+24.81%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.05%	-22.25%	+19.20%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.59%	25.10%	-24.51%

Volatility

PHYL vs. FNGU - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for PGIM Active High Yield Bond ETF (PHYL) is 1.06%, while MicroSectors FANG+ 3X Leveraged ETNs (FNGU) has a volatility of 32.41%. 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.

Volatility by Period

	PHYL	FNGU	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.06%	32.41%	-31.35%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	2.73%	52.02%	-49.29%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	3.35%	64.11%	-60.76%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	5.70%	81.02%	-75.32%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	7.64%	81.02%	-73.38%

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 6.99%, while FNGU has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018
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	6.99%	7.05%	8.28%	7.62%	6.55%	6.13%	7.51%	7.31%	1.79%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both PHYL and FNGU in my portfolio?

PHYL and FNGU 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.

Which is riskier, PHYL or FNGU?

FNGU has higher volatility (32.41%) compared to PHYL (1.06%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PHYL dropped -22.07% vs FNGU's -61.30%.

Which ETF is better, PHYL or FNGU?

On 1-year performance, FNGU leads with 30.95% vs 6.79% for PHYL. 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.

Which ETF has performed better, PHYL or FNGU?

Over the 1-year period, FNGU has performed better with a 30.95% return vs 6.79%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, PHYL or FNGU?

PHYL is cheaper with a 0.53% expense ratio, compared with 2.60% for FNGU.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, PHYL or FNGU?

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

What is the main difference between PHYL and FNGU?

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

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

PHYL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.04 vs 0.49), 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.