XMMO vs. FNGS

Last updated Jun 13, 2026

XMMO (Invesco S&P MidCap Momentum ETF) and FNGS (MicroSectors FANG+ ETN) are both exchange-traded funds - XMMO is a Momentum fund tracking the S&P MidCap 400 Momentum Index, while FNGS is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund tracking the NYSE FANG+ Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, XMMO returned 15.91%/yr vs 19.76%/yr for FNGS. A 0.59 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. XMMO charges 0.35%/yr vs 0.58%/yr for FNGS.

Performance

XMMO vs. FNGS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Invesco S&P MidCap Momentum ETF (XMMO) 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, XMMO achieves a 22.77% return, which is significantly higher than FNGS's 6.79% return.

XMMO

• 1D: 0.96%
• 1M: 0.99%
• YTD: 22.77%
• 6M: 22.33%
• 1Y: 36.63%
• 3Y*: 30.62%
• 5Y*: 15.91%
• 10Y*: 19.95%

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)

XMMO vs. FNGS - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019
XMMO Invesco S&P MidCap Momentum ETF	22.77%	13.04%	38.03%	20.39%	-16.02%	16.69%	29.17%	4.13%
FNGS MicroSectors FANG+ ETN	6.79%	18.64%	51.99%	95.24%	-40.32%	16.96%	101.99%	10.10%

Correlation

The correlation between XMMO and FNGS is 0.48, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.48
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.55
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.59
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 13, 2019	0.59

The correlation between XMMO and FNGS shifts across timeframes, from 0.48 (1 year) to 0.59 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

XMMO vs. FNGS - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	XMMO	FNGS
Industrials	41.1%	-
Technology	16.7%	59.9%
Energy	7.7%	-
Basic Materials	7.2%	-
Healthcare	6.3%	-
Real Estate	6.1%	-
Utilities	5.8%	-
Consumer Cyclical	4.6%	11.3%
Financial Services	2.4%	10.0%
Communication Services	1.6%	28.8%
Consumer Defensive	0.5%	-

Return for Risk

XMMO vs. FNGS — Risk / Return Rank

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

XMMO

XMMO Risk / Return Rank: 74
XMMO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 65
XMMO Sortino Ratio Rank: 65
XMMO Omega Ratio Rank: 63
XMMO Calmar Ratio Rank: 88
XMMO Martin Ratio Rank: 89

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.

XMMO vs. FNGS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco S&P MidCap Momentum ETF (XMMO) 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.

	XMMO	FNGS	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.86	0.79	+1.07
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.58	1.19	+1.39
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.33	1.15	+0.18
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.41	0.75	+3.67
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	17.54	2.12	+15.42

XMMO vs. FNGS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XMMO Sharpe Ratio is 1.86, which is higher than the FNGS Sharpe Ratio of 0.79. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XMMO 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

XMMO vs. FNGS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XMMO drawdown since its inception was -55.37%, which is greater than FNGS's maximum drawdown of -48.98%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XMMO and FNGS.

Drawdown Indicators

	XMMO	FNGS	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-55.37%	-48.98%	-6.39%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-8.34%	-22.93%	+14.59%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-24.93%	-26.77%	+1.84%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-27.91%	-48.98%	+21.07%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-36.74%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.19%	-9.63%	+8.44%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-9.44%	-10.85%	+1.41%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.09%	8.05%	-5.96%

Volatility

XMMO vs. FNGS - Volatility Comparison

Invesco S&P MidCap Momentum ETF (XMMO) and MicroSectors FANG+ ETN (FNGS) have volatilities of 9.07% and 8.74%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	XMMO	FNGS	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	9.07%	8.74%	+0.33%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	16.76%	17.19%	-0.43%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	19.74%	21.65%	-1.91%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	21.62%	30.10%	-8.48%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	22.35%	31.17%	-8.82%

XMMO vs. FNGS - Expense Ratio Comparison

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

Dividends

XMMO vs. FNGS - Dividend Comparison

XMMO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.61%, 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%
XMMO Invesco S&P MidCap Momentum ETF	0.61%	0.78%	0.34%	0.80%	1.43%	0.41%	0.61%	0.60%	0.19%	0.21%	0.22%	0.64%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both XMMO and FNGS in my portfolio?

XMMO and FNGS have a correlation of 0.48, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, XMMO or FNGS?

XMMO has higher volatility (9.07%) compared to FNGS (8.74%). In terms of maximum drawdown, XMMO dropped -55.37% vs FNGS's -48.98%.

Which ETF is better, XMMO or FNGS?

On 5-year performance, FNGS leads with 19.76% vs 15.91% for XMMO. On fees, XMMO 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, XMMO or FNGS?

Over the 5-year period, FNGS has performed better with a 19.76% return vs 15.91%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, XMMO or FNGS?

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

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

XMMO has the higher dividend yield at 0.61%, compared with 0.00% for FNGS.

What is the main difference between XMMO and FNGS?

XMMO is categorized as Momentum, while FNGS is Large Cap Growth Equities. XMMO tracks S&P MidCap 400 Momentum Index, while FNGS tracks NYSE FANG+ Index. They also come from different issuers: Invesco and BMO. Their fees differ too: 0.35% for XMMO and 0.58% for FNGS.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

XMMO currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.86 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.