SMH vs. FNGS

Last updated Jun 13, 2026

SMH (VanEck Semiconductor ETF) and FNGS (MicroSectors FANG+ ETN) are both exchange-traded funds - SMH is a Semiconductors fund tracking the MVIS US Listed Semiconductor 25 Index, while FNGS is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund tracking the NYSE FANG+ Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, SMH returned 38.42%/yr vs 19.76%/yr for FNGS. A 0.77 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. SMH charges 0.35%/yr vs 0.58%/yr for FNGS.

Performance

SMH vs. FNGS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in VanEck Semiconductor ETF (SMH) 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, SMH achieves a 72.15% return, which is significantly higher than FNGS's 6.79% return.

SMH

• 1D: 1.72%
• 1M: 8.30%
• YTD: 72.15%
• 6M: 75.62%
• 1Y: 136.32%
• 3Y*: 60.05%
• 5Y*: 38.42%
• 10Y*: 37.49%

FNGS

• 1D: -0.94%
• 1M: -3.20%
• YTD: 6.79%
• 6M: 4.25%
• 1Y: 17.02%
• 3Y*: 29.80%
• 5Y*: 19.76%
• 10Y*: —

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

SMH vs. FNGS - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019
SMH VanEck Semiconductor ETF	72.15%	49.17%	39.10%	73.38%	-33.53%	42.13%	55.53%	7.96%
FNGS MicroSectors FANG+ ETN	6.79%	18.64%	51.99%	95.24%	-40.32%	16.96%	101.99%	10.10%

Correlation

The correlation between SMH and FNGS is 0.66, 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	0.66
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.74
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.78
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 13, 2019	0.77

The correlation between SMH and FNGS shifts across timeframes, from 0.66 (1 year) to 0.78 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

SMH vs. FNGS - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	SMH	FNGS
Technology	100.0%	59.9%
Basic Materials	-	-
Communication Services	-	28.8%
Consumer Cyclical	-	11.3%
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Energy	-	-
Financial Services	-	10.0%
Healthcare	-	-
Industrials	-	-
Real Estate	-	-
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

SMH vs. FNGS — Risk / Return Rank

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

SMH

SMH Risk / Return Rank: 96
SMH Sharpe Ratio Rank: 97
SMH Sortino Ratio Rank: 94
SMH Omega Ratio Rank: 94
SMH Calmar Ratio Rank: 97
SMH Martin Ratio Rank: 96

FNGS

FNGS Risk / Return Rank: 23
FNGS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 25
FNGS Sortino Ratio Rank: 24
FNGS Omega Ratio Rank: 24
FNGS Calmar Ratio Rank: 20
FNGS Martin Ratio Rank: 20

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.

SMH vs. FNGS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for VanEck Semiconductor ETF (SMH) 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.

	SMH	FNGS	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	4.13	0.79	+3.34
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	4.26	1.19	+3.07
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.60	1.15	+0.45
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	9.18	0.75	+8.44
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	33.74	2.12	+31.62

SMH vs. FNGS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current SMH Sharpe Ratio is 4.13, which is higher than the FNGS Sharpe Ratio of 0.79. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of SMH 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.

Drawdowns

SMH vs. FNGS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum SMH drawdown since its inception was -84.96%, which is greater than FNGS's maximum drawdown of -48.98%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for SMH and FNGS.

Drawdown Indicators

	SMH	FNGS	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-84.96%	-48.98%	-35.98%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-14.93%	-22.93%	+8.00%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-35.74%	-26.77%	-8.97%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-45.30%	-48.98%	+3.68%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-45.30%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.81%	-9.63%	+6.82%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-41.04%	-10.85%	-30.19%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.06%	8.05%	-3.99%

Volatility

SMH vs. FNGS - Volatility Comparison

VanEck Semiconductor ETF (SMH) has a higher volatility of 16.25% compared to MicroSectors FANG+ ETN (FNGS) at 8.74%. This indicates that SMH's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FNGS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	SMH	FNGS	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	16.25%	8.74%	+7.51%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	27.73%	17.19%	+10.54%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	33.20%	21.65%	+11.55%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	35.47%	30.10%	+5.37%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	32.82%	31.17%	+1.65%

SMH vs. FNGS - Expense Ratio Comparison

SMH has a 0.35% expense ratio, which is lower than FNGS's 0.58% expense ratio.

Dividends

SMH vs. FNGS - Dividend Comparison

SMH's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.18%, while FNGS has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
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%
SMH VanEck Semiconductor ETF	0.18%	0.31%	0.44%	0.60%	1.18%	0.51%	0.69%	1.50%	1.88%	1.43%	0.80%	2.14%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both SMH and FNGS in my portfolio?

SMH and FNGS have a correlation of 0.66, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, SMH or FNGS?

SMH has higher volatility (16.25%) compared to FNGS (8.74%). In terms of maximum drawdown, SMH dropped -84.96% vs FNGS's -48.98%.

Which ETF is better, SMH or FNGS?

On 5-year performance, SMH leads with 38.42% vs 19.76% for FNGS. On fees, SMH is cheaper at 0.35% per year. On volatility, FNGS has been the lower-risk option at 8.74%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, SMH or FNGS?

Over the 5-year period, SMH has performed better with a 38.42% return vs 19.76%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, SMH or FNGS?

SMH is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.58% for FNGS.

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

SMH has the higher dividend yield at 0.18%, compared with 0.00% for FNGS.

What is the main difference between SMH and FNGS?

SMH is categorized as Semiconductors, while FNGS is Large Cap Growth Equities. SMH tracks MVIS US Listed Semiconductor 25 Index, while FNGS tracks NYSE FANG+ Index. They also come from different issuers: VanEck and BMO. Their fees differ too: 0.35% for SMH and 0.58% for FNGS.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

SMH currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (4.13 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.