PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
XXXX vs. NRGU
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

XXXX vs. NRGU - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in MAX S&P 500 4X Leveraged ETN (XXXX) and MicroSectors U.S. Big Oil Index 3X Leveraged ETN (NRGU). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, XXXX achieves a 31.29% return, which is significantly lower than NRGU's 125.94% return.


XXXX

1D
1.52%
1M
16.66%
YTD
31.29%
6M
27.73%
1Y
90.17%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*

NRGU

1D
-1.47%
1M
-6.46%
YTD
125.94%
6M
93.16%
1Y
171.19%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

XXXX vs. NRGU - Yearly Performance Comparison


Correlation

The correlation between XXXX and NRGU is -0.10, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

-0.10

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 21, 2025

0.10

The correlation between XXXX and NRGU shifts across timeframes, from -0.10 (1 year) to 0.10 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

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


Return for Risk

XXXX vs. NRGU — Risk / Return Rank

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

XXXX
XXXX Risk / Return Rank: 5353
Overall Rank
XXXX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5858
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XXXX Sortino Ratio Rank: 4949
Sortino Ratio Rank
XXXX Omega Ratio Rank: 5151
Omega Ratio Rank
XXXX Calmar Ratio Rank: 5050
Calmar Ratio Rank
XXXX Martin Ratio Rank: 5555
Martin Ratio Rank

NRGU
NRGU Risk / Return Rank: 6464
Overall Rank
NRGU Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7272
Sharpe Ratio Rank
NRGU Sortino Ratio Rank: 5353
Sortino Ratio Rank
NRGU Omega Ratio Rank: 5353
Omega Ratio Rank
NRGU Calmar Ratio Rank: 8282
Calmar Ratio Rank
NRGU Martin Ratio Rank: 6161
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.

XXXX vs. NRGU - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for MAX S&P 500 4X Leveraged ETN (XXXX) 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.


XXXXNRGUDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.37

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.19

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.31

1.32

-0.01

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.43

4.31

-1.88

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

9.30

10.74

-1.43

XXXX vs. NRGU - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XXXX Sharpe Ratio is 1.94, which is comparable to the NRGU Sharpe Ratio of 2.31. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XXXX 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.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


XXXXNRGUDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.94

2.31

-0.37

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.88

0.43

+0.45

Drawdowns

XXXX vs. NRGU - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XXXX drawdown since its inception was -62.27%, which is greater than NRGU's maximum drawdown of -57.50%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XXXX and NRGU.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


XXXXNRGUDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-62.27%

-57.50%

-4.77%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-37.25%

-39.95%

+2.70%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.40%

-22.07%

+20.67%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-11.59%

-25.41%

+13.82%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

9.73%

16.01%

-6.28%

Volatility

XXXX vs. NRGU - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for MAX S&P 500 4X Leveraged ETN (XXXX) is 11.10%, while MicroSectors U.S. Big Oil Index 3X Leveraged ETN (NRGU) has a volatility of 31.62%. This indicates that XXXX 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.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


XXXXNRGUDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

11.10%

31.62%

-20.52%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

35.43%

61.19%

-25.76%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

46.80%

75.02%

-28.22%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

60.71%

89.03%

-28.32%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

60.71%

89.03%

-28.32%

XXXX vs. NRGU - Expense Ratio Comparison

XXXX has a 2.95% expense ratio, which is higher than NRGU's 0.95% expense ratio.


Dividends

XXXX vs. NRGU - Dividend Comparison

Neither XXXX nor NRGU has paid dividends to shareholders.


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions


XXXX and NRGU have a correlation of -0.10, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

NRGU has higher volatility (31.62%) compared to XXXX (11.10%). In terms of maximum drawdown, XXXX dropped -62.27% vs NRGU's -57.50%.

On 1-year performance, NRGU leads with 171.19% vs 90.17% for XXXX. On fees, NRGU is cheaper at 0.95% per year. On volatility, XXXX has been the lower-risk option at 11.10%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, NRGU has performed better with a 171.19% return vs 90.17%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

NRGU is cheaper with a 0.95% expense ratio, compared with 2.95% for XXXX.

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

XXXX tracks S&P 500, while NRGU tracks Solactive MicroSectors U.S. Big Oil Index (-300%). They also come from different issuers: Max and BMO. Their fees differ too: 2.95% for XXXX and 0.95% for NRGU.

NRGU currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.31 vs 1.94), 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 XXXX and NRGU

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