WTIU vs. NRGU

Last updated Jun 3, 2026

WTIU (MicroSectors Energy 3X Leveraged ETN) and NRGU (MicroSectors U.S. Big Oil Index 3X Leveraged ETN) are both Leveraged Equities funds - WTIU tracks the Solactive MicroSectors Energy Index - Benchmark TR Gross (--300%) while NRGU tracks the Solactive MicroSectors U.S. Big Oil Index (-300%). Both are passively managed. Over the past year, WTIU returned 103.84% vs 164.28% for NRGU. With a 0.97 correlation, they move nearly in lockstep. Both charge a 0.95% expense ratio.

Performance

WTIU vs. NRGU - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in MicroSectors Energy 3X Leveraged ETN (WTIU) and MicroSectors U.S. Big Oil Index 3X Leveraged ETN (NRGU). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, WTIU achieves a 84.16% return, which is significantly lower than NRGU's 123.66% return.

WTIU

• 1D: 2.52%
• 1M: -7.88%
• YTD: 84.16%
• 6M: 66.93%
• 1Y: 103.84%
• 3Y*: 4.54%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

NRGU

• 1D: 3.44%
• 1M: -3.38%
• YTD: 123.66%
• 6M: 98.58%
• 1Y: 164.28%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

WTIU vs. NRGU - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
WTIU MicroSectors Energy 3X Leveraged ETN	84.16%	-32.40%
NRGU MicroSectors U.S. Big Oil Index 3X Leveraged ETN	123.66%	-33.00%

Correlation

The correlation between WTIU and NRGU is 0.96 - these two move nearly in lockstep. At this level, holding both provides almost no diversification benefit. If you already own one, adding the other does little to reduce portfolio risk.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.96
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 21, 2025	0.97

The correlation between WTIU and NRGU has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.96 to 0.97 - a consistent structural relationship.

WTIU vs. NRGU - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	WTIU	NRGU
Energy	100.0%	100.0%
Basic Materials	-	-
Communication Services	-	-
Consumer Cyclical	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Financial Services	-	-
Healthcare	-	-
Industrials	-	-
Real Estate	-	-
Technology	-	-
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

WTIU vs. NRGU — Risk / Return Rank

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

WTIU

WTIU Risk / Return Rank: 44
WTIU Sharpe Ratio Rank: 44
WTIU Sortino Ratio Rank: 38
WTIU Omega Ratio Rank: 38
WTIU Calmar Ratio Rank: 57
WTIU Martin Ratio Rank: 43

NRGU

NRGU Risk / Return Rank: 62
NRGU Sharpe Ratio Rank: 65
NRGU Sortino Ratio Rank: 51
NRGU Omega Ratio Rank: 50
NRGU Calmar Ratio Rank: 82
NRGU Martin Ratio Rank: 60

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.

WTIU vs. NRGU - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for MicroSectors Energy 3X Leveraged ETN (WTIU) and MicroSectors U.S. Big Oil Index 3X Leveraged ETN (NRGU). 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.

	WTIU	NRGU	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	1.55	2.20	-0.65
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	2.00	2.49	-0.49
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.25	1.31	-0.06
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.85	4.31	-1.46
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	7.09	10.83	-3.75
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

WTIU vs. NRGU - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current WTIU Sharpe Ratio is 1.55, which is comparable to the NRGU Sharpe Ratio of 2.20. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of WTIU and NRGU, 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

	WTIU	NRGU	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.55	2.20	-0.65
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	-0.11	0.42	-0.53

Drawdowns

WTIU vs. NRGU - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum WTIU drawdown since its inception was -75.73%, which is greater than NRGU's maximum drawdown of -57.50%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for WTIU and NRGU.

Drawdown Indicators

	WTIU	NRGU	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-75.73%	-57.50%	-18.23%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-39.11%	-39.95%	+0.84%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-75.73%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-34.72%	-22.86%	-11.86%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-39.19%	-25.43%	-13.76%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	15.74%	15.91%	-0.17%

Volatility

WTIU vs. NRGU - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for MicroSectors Energy 3X Leveraged ETN (WTIU) is 27.04%, while MicroSectors U.S. Big Oil Index 3X Leveraged ETN (NRGU) has a volatility of 32.14%. This indicates that WTIU experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than NRGU based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	WTIU	NRGU	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	27.04%	32.14%	-5.10%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	54.87%	61.37%	-6.50%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	67.49%	75.17%	-7.68%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	70.62%	89.27%	-18.65%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	70.62%	89.27%	-18.65%

WTIU vs. NRGU - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both WTIU and NRGU have an expense ratio of 0.95%.

Dividends

WTIU vs. NRGU - Dividend Comparison

Neither WTIU nor NRGU has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both WTIU and NRGU in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.96, WTIU and NRGU move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

Which is riskier, WTIU or NRGU?

NRGU has higher volatility (32.14%) compared to WTIU (27.04%). In terms of maximum drawdown, WTIU dropped -75.73% vs NRGU's -57.50%.

Which ETF is better, WTIU or NRGU?

On 1-year performance, NRGU leads with 164.28% vs 103.84% for WTIU. Both ETFs have the same 0.95% expense ratio. On volatility, WTIU has been the lower-risk option at 27.04%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, WTIU or NRGU?

Over the 1-year period, NRGU has performed better with a 164.28% return vs 103.84%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, WTIU or NRGU?

WTIU and NRGU have the same expense ratio: 0.95% per year.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, WTIU or NRGU?

WTIU and NRGU have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

What is the main difference between WTIU and NRGU?

WTIU tracks Solactive MicroSectors Energy Index - Benchmark TR Gross (--300%), while NRGU tracks Solactive MicroSectors U.S. Big Oil Index (-300%). They also come from different issuers: REX and BMO.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

NRGU currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.20 vs 1.55), 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.