UTES vs. FNGO

Last updated Jun 13, 2026

UTES (Virtus Reaves Utilities ETF) and FNGO (MicroSectors FANG+ Index 2X Leveraged ETN) are both exchange-traded funds - UTES is a Utilities Equities fund actively managed by Virtus Investment Partners, while FNGO is a Leveraged Equities fund tracking the NYSE FANG+ Index (+200%). UTES is actively managed, while FNGO is passively managed. Over the past 5 years, UTES returned 15.32%/yr vs 25.62%/yr for FNGO. At a 0.23 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. UTES charges 0.49%/yr vs 0.95%/yr for FNGO.

Performance

UTES vs. FNGO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Virtus Reaves Utilities ETF (UTES) and MicroSectors FANG+ Index 2X Leveraged ETN (FNGO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, UTES achieves a 0.26% return, which is significantly lower than FNGO's 8.91% return.

UTES

• 1D: 1.56%
• 1M: -0.29%
• YTD: 0.26%
• 6M: 0.49%
• 1Y: 8.31%
• 3Y*: 22.00%
• 5Y*: 15.32%
• 10Y*: 12.27%

FNGO

• 1D: -1.60%
• 1M: -7.03%
• YTD: 8.91%
• 6M: 3.86%
• 1Y: 26.54%
• 3Y*: 49.78%
• 5Y*: 25.62%
• 10Y*: —

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

UTES vs. FNGO - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018
UTES Virtus Reaves Utilities ETF	0.26%	25.71%	45.35%	-2.46%	0.80%	20.74%	-0.30%	25.48%	0.73%
FNGO MicroSectors FANG+ Index 2X Leveraged ETN	8.91%	25.49%	101.65%	240.10%	-71.55%	28.38%	238.00%	79.61%	-39.85%

Correlation

The correlation between UTES and FNGO is 0.21, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.21
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.23
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.25
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 2, 2018	0.23

UTES vs. FNGO - Sectors Allocation Comparison

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

Return for Risk

UTES vs. FNGO — Risk / Return Rank

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

UTES

UTES Risk / Return Rank: 16
UTES Sharpe Ratio Rank: 16
UTES Sortino Ratio Rank: 16
UTES Omega Ratio Rank: 15
UTES Calmar Ratio Rank: 18
UTES Martin Ratio Rank: 17

FNGO

FNGO Risk / Return Rank: 20
FNGO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 21
FNGO Sortino Ratio Rank: 22
FNGO Omega Ratio Rank: 22
FNGO Calmar Ratio Rank: 18
FNGO Martin Ratio Rank: 18

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.

UTES vs. FNGO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Virtus Reaves Utilities ETF (UTES) and MicroSectors FANG+ Index 2X Leveraged ETN (FNGO). 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.

	UTES	FNGO	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.39	0.64	-0.24
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.67	1.10	-0.43
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.08	1.13	-0.05
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.60	0.62	-0.02
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	1.32	1.62	-0.29

UTES vs. FNGO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current UTES Sharpe Ratio is 0.39, which is lower than the FNGO Sharpe Ratio of 0.64. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of UTES and FNGO, 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

UTES vs. FNGO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum UTES drawdown since its inception was -35.39%, smaller than the maximum FNGO drawdown of -78.39%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for UTES and FNGO.

Drawdown Indicators

	UTES	FNGO	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-35.39%	-78.39%	+43.00%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-13.88%	-42.73%	+28.85%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-17.62%	-47.64%	+30.02%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-20.40%	-78.39%	+57.99%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-35.39%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-9.10%	-18.46%	+9.36%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-5.53%	-23.87%	+18.34%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	6.29%	16.45%	-10.16%

Volatility

UTES vs. FNGO - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Virtus Reaves Utilities ETF (UTES) is 7.23%, while MicroSectors FANG+ Index 2X Leveraged ETN (FNGO) has a volatility of 17.58%. This indicates that UTES experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FNGO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	UTES	FNGO	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	7.23%	17.58%	-10.35%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	17.05%	33.63%	-16.58%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	21.32%	41.88%	-20.56%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	20.62%	60.50%	-39.88%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	20.17%	61.61%	-41.44%

UTES vs. FNGO - Expense Ratio Comparison

UTES has a 0.49% expense ratio, which is lower than FNGO's 0.95% expense ratio.

Dividends

UTES vs. FNGO - Dividend Comparison

UTES's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.49%, while FNGO has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
FNGO MicroSectors FANG+ Index 2X Leveraged 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%
UTES Virtus Reaves Utilities ETF	1.49%	1.42%	1.51%	2.44%	2.13%	1.94%	2.09%	1.84%	2.09%	3.44%	3.53%	0.61%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both UTES and FNGO in my portfolio?

UTES and FNGO have a correlation of 0.21, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, UTES or FNGO?

FNGO has higher volatility (17.58%) compared to UTES (7.23%). In terms of maximum drawdown, UTES dropped -35.39% vs FNGO's -78.39%.

Which ETF is better, UTES or FNGO?

On 5-year performance, FNGO leads with 25.62% vs 15.32% for UTES. On fees, UTES is cheaper at 0.49% per year. On volatility, UTES has been the lower-risk option at 7.23%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, UTES or FNGO?

Over the 5-year period, FNGO has performed better with a 25.62% return vs 15.32%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, UTES or FNGO?

UTES is cheaper with a 0.49% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for FNGO.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, UTES or FNGO?

UTES has the higher dividend yield at 1.49%, compared with 0.00% for FNGO.

What is the main difference between UTES and FNGO?

UTES is categorized as Utilities Equities, while FNGO is Leveraged Equities. They also come from different issuers: Virtus Investment Partners and Bank of Montreal. Their fees differ too: 0.49% for UTES and 0.95% for FNGO.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FNGO currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.64 vs 0.39), 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.