PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
QQQ vs. FNGS
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

QQQ vs. FNGS

Last updated Jun 14, 2026

QQQ (Invesco QQQ ETF) and FNGS (MicroSectors FANG+ ETN) are both exchange-traded funds - QQQ is a Nasdaq-100 fund tracking the NASDAQ-100 Index, while FNGS is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund tracking the NYSE FANG+ Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, QQQ returned 16.85%/yr vs 19.76%/yr for FNGS. Their correlation of 0.90 suggests significant overlap in exposure. QQQ charges 0.18%/yr vs 0.58%/yr for FNGS.

Performance

QQQ vs. FNGS - Performance Comparison

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

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, QQQ achieves a 17.57% return, which is significantly higher than FNGS's 6.79% return.

QQQ

1D
0.59%
1M
0.22%
YTD
17.57%
6M
17.85%
1Y
37.55%
3Y*
26.43%
5Y*
16.85%
10Y*
21.79%

FNGS

1D
-0.94%
1M
-3.68%
YTD
6.79%
6M
4.25%
1Y
19.09%
3Y*
29.80%
5Y*
19.76%
10Y*
—
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

QQQ vs. FNGS - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)2025202420232022202120202019
QQQ
Invesco QQQ ETF		17.57%20.77%25.58%54.86%-32.58%27.42%48.62%5.72%
FNGS
MicroSectors FANG+ ETN		6.79%18.64%51.99%95.24%-40.32%16.96%101.99%10.10%

Correlation

The correlation between QQQ 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 (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.90

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

0.91

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 13, 2019

0.90

The correlation between QQQ and FNGS has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.87 to 0.91 - a consistent structural relationship.

QQQ vs. FNGS - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
QQQ
FNGS

Technology

58.7%
63.4%

Communication Services

14.3%
26.0%

Consumer Cyclical

11.4%
10.6%

Consumer Defensive

6.4%

-

Healthcare

3.7%

-

Industrials

2.6%

-

Utilities

1.2%

-

Basic Materials

1.0%

-

Energy

0.5%

-

Financial Services

0.2%
10.0%

Real Estate

0.1%

-

Technology

QQQ
58.7%
FNGS
63.4%

Communication Services

QQQ
14.3%
FNGS
26.0%

Consumer Cyclical

QQQ
11.4%
FNGS
10.6%

Consumer Defensive

QQQ
6.4%
FNGS

-

Healthcare

QQQ
3.7%
FNGS

-

Industrials

QQQ
2.6%
FNGS

-

Utilities

QQQ
1.2%
FNGS

-

Basic Materials

QQQ
1.0%
FNGS

-

Energy

QQQ
0.5%
FNGS

-

Financial Services

QQQ
0.2%
FNGS
10.0%

Real Estate

QQQ
0.1%
FNGS

-

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.

Invesco QQQ ETF

MicroSectors FANG+ ETN

Often compared with QQQ:
QQQ vs. SPYQQQ vs. VOOQQQ vs. VGTQQQ vs. TQQQQQQ vs. SMHQQQ vs. QQQMQQQ vs. QQQI
Often compared with FNGS:
FNGS vs. MAGSFNGS vs. SPYFNGS vs. FNGOFNGS vs. QLDFNGS vs. SMHFNGS vs. MON100.NSFNGS vs. VOO

Return for Risk

QQQ vs. FNGS — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
QQQ
QQQ Risk / Return Rank: 7171
Overall Rank
QQQ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7575
Sharpe Ratio Rank
QQQ Sortino Ratio Rank: 7070
Sortino Ratio Rank
QQQ Omega Ratio Rank: 7373
Omega Ratio Rank
QQQ Calmar Ratio Rank: 6969
Calmar Ratio Rank
QQQ Martin Ratio Rank: 7070
Martin Ratio Rank
FNGS
FNGS Risk / Return Rank: 2323
Overall Rank
FNGS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2525
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FNGS Sortino Ratio Rank: 2424
Sortino Ratio Rank
FNGS Omega Ratio Rank: 2424
Omega Ratio Rank
FNGS Calmar Ratio Rank: 2020
Calmar Ratio Rank
FNGS Martin Ratio Rank: 2020
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.

QQQ vs. FNGS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

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

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.

QQQFNGSDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
2.09
0.79

+1.30

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
2.73
1.19

+1.54

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.37

1.15

+0.22

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.01

0.75

+2.26

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

11.22

2.12

+9.10

QQQ vs. FNGS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current QQQ Sharpe Ratio is 2.09, which is higher than the FNGS Sharpe Ratio of 0.79. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of QQQ 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.

Loading charts...

Drawdowns

QQQ vs. FNGS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QQQ drawdown since its inception was -82.97%, which is greater than FNGS's maximum drawdown of -48.98%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QQQ and FNGS.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

QQQFNGSDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-82.97%

-48.98%

-33.99%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-11.96%

-22.93%

+10.97%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-22.77%

-26.77%

+4.00%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-35.12%

-48.98%

+13.86%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-35.12%

—

—

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-3.33%

-9.63%

+6.30%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-32.75%

-10.85%

-21.90%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.20%

8.05%

-4.85%

Volatility

QQQ vs. FNGS - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Invesco QQQ ETF (QQQ) is 7.56%, while MicroSectors FANG+ ETN (FNGS) has a volatility of 8.74%. This indicates that QQQ 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.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

QQQFNGSDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

7.56%

8.74%

-1.18%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

13.81%

17.19%

-3.38%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

17.19%

21.65%

-4.46%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

22.55%

30.10%

-7.55%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

22.38%

31.17%

-8.79%

QQQ vs. FNGS - Expense Ratio Comparison

QQQ has a 0.18% expense ratio, which is lower than FNGS's 0.58% expense ratio.

Dividends

QQQ vs. FNGS - Dividend Comparison

QQQ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.39%, while FNGS has not paid dividends to shareholders.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
FNGS
MicroSectors FANG+ ETN		0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
QQQ
Invesco QQQ ETF		0.39%0.45%0.56%0.62%0.80%0.43%0.55%0.74%0.91%0.84%1.06%0.99%

Frequently Asked Questions

QQQ 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.

FNGS has higher volatility (8.74%) compared to QQQ (7.56%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QQQ dropped -82.97% vs FNGS's -48.98%.

On 5-year performance, FNGS leads with 19.76% vs 16.85% for QQQ. On fees, QQQ is cheaper at 0.18% per year. On volatility, QQQ has been the lower-risk option at 7.56%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 5-year period, FNGS has performed better with a 19.76% return vs 16.85%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

QQQ is cheaper with a 0.18% expense ratio, compared with 0.58% for FNGS.

QQQ has the higher dividend yield at 0.39%, compared with 0.00% for FNGS.

QQQ is categorized as Nasdaq-100, while FNGS is Large Cap Growth Equities. QQQ tracks NASDAQ-100 Index, while FNGS tracks NYSE FANG+ Index. They also come from different issuers: Invesco and BMO. Their fees differ too: 0.18% for QQQ and 0.58% for FNGS.

QQQ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.09 vs 0.79), 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 QQQ and FNGS

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