QBIG vs. FNGS

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

QBIG (Invesco Top QQQ ETF) and FNGS (MicroSectors FANG+ ETN) are both exchange-traded funds - QBIG is a Large Cap Blend Equities fund actively managed by Invesco, while FNGS is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund tracking the NYSE FANG+ Index. QBIG is actively managed, while FNGS is passively managed. Over the past year, QBIG returned 35.93% vs 29.78% for FNGS. Their correlation of 0.90 suggests significant overlap in exposure. QBIG charges 0.29%/yr vs 0.58%/yr for FNGS.

Performance

QBIG vs. FNGS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Invesco Top QQQ ETF (QBIG) and MicroSectors FANG+ ETN (FNGS). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, QBIG achieves a 8.80% return, which is significantly lower than FNGS's 16.26% return.

QBIG

• 1D: -1.97%
• 1M: 3.99%
• YTD: 8.80%
• 6M: 6.39%
• 1Y: 35.93%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

FNGS

• 1D: -0.98%
• 1M: 11.24%
• YTD: 16.26%
• 6M: 10.77%
• 1Y: 29.78%
• 3Y*: 35.29%
• 5Y*: 22.01%
• 10Y*: —

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

QBIG vs. FNGS - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
QBIG Invesco Top QQQ ETF	8.80%	21.46%	3.04%
FNGS MicroSectors FANG+ ETN	16.26%	18.64%	2.01%

Correlation

The correlation between QBIG and FNGS is 0.87, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.87
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 5, 2024	0.90

The correlation between QBIG and FNGS has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.87 to 0.90 - a consistent structural relationship.

QBIG vs. FNGS - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	QBIG	FNGS
Technology	19.4%	59.9%
Financial Services	14.8%	10.0%
Consumer Cyclical	7.9%	11.3%
Communication Services	6.0%	28.8%
Basic Materials	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Energy	-	-
Healthcare	-	-
Industrials	-	-
Real Estate	-	-
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

QBIG vs. FNGS — Risk / Return Rank

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

QBIG

QBIG Risk / Return Rank: 45
QBIG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 53
QBIG Sortino Ratio Rank: 50
QBIG Omega Ratio Rank: 49
QBIG Calmar Ratio Rank: 37
QBIG Martin Ratio Rank: 36

FNGS

FNGS Risk / Return Rank: 34
FNGS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 40
FNGS Sortino Ratio Rank: 39
FNGS Omega Ratio Rank: 38
FNGS Calmar Ratio Rank: 27
FNGS Martin Ratio Rank: 27

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.

QBIG vs. FNGS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco Top QQQ ETF (QBIG) 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.

	QBIG	FNGS	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.86	1.46	+0.40
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.48	2.03	+0.44
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.31	1.26	+0.05
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.83	1.30	+0.53
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	5.73	3.77	+1.96
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

QBIG vs. FNGS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current QBIG Sharpe Ratio is 1.86, which is comparable to the FNGS Sharpe Ratio of 1.46. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of QBIG and FNGS, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	QBIG	FNGS	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.86	1.46	+0.40
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.74	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.85	1.06	-0.21

Drawdowns

QBIG vs. FNGS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QBIG drawdown since its inception was -30.33%, smaller than the maximum FNGS drawdown of -48.98%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QBIG and FNGS.

Drawdown Indicators

	QBIG	FNGS	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-30.33%	-48.98%	+18.65%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-19.70%	-22.93%	+3.23%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-26.77%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-48.98%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-3.34%	-1.61%	-1.73%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-7.02%	-10.87%	+3.85%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	6.29%	7.92%	-1.63%

Volatility

QBIG vs. FNGS - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Invesco Top QQQ ETF (QBIG) is 5.32%, while MicroSectors FANG+ ETN (FNGS) has a volatility of 5.64%. This indicates that QBIG experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FNGS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	QBIG	FNGS	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.32%	5.64%	-0.32%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	14.64%	15.68%	-1.04%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	19.43%	20.49%	-1.06%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	27.32%	29.96%	-2.64%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	27.32%	31.12%	-3.80%

QBIG vs. FNGS - Expense Ratio Comparison

QBIG has a 0.29% expense ratio, which is lower than FNGS's 0.58% expense ratio.

Dividends

QBIG vs. FNGS - Dividend Comparison

Neither QBIG nor FNGS has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both QBIG and FNGS in my portfolio?

QBIG and FNGS have a correlation of 0.87, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, QBIG or FNGS?

FNGS has higher volatility (5.64%) compared to QBIG (5.32%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QBIG dropped -30.33% vs FNGS's -48.98%.

Which ETF is better, QBIG or FNGS?

On 1-year performance, QBIG leads with 35.93% vs 29.78% for FNGS. On fees, QBIG is cheaper at 0.29% per year. On volatility, QBIG has been the lower-risk option at 5.32%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, QBIG or FNGS?

Over the 1-year period, QBIG has performed better with a 35.93% return vs 29.78%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, QBIG or FNGS?

QBIG is cheaper with a 0.29% expense ratio, compared with 0.58% for FNGS.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, QBIG or FNGS?

QBIG and FNGS have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

What is the main difference between QBIG and FNGS?

QBIG is categorized as Large Cap Blend Equities, while FNGS is Large Cap Growth Equities. They also come from different issuers: Invesco and BMO. Their fees differ too: 0.29% for QBIG and 0.58% for FNGS.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

QBIG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.86 vs 1.46), 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.