FNGO vs QQQ
MicroSectors FANG+ Index 2X Leveraged ETN vs Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1
Quick Verdict
QQQ has a lower expense ratio. FNGO delivered stronger 1-year returns. QQQ offers more diversification with 108 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | FNGO | QQQ | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.95% | 0.18% | |
| AUM | $772M | $496.3B | |
| Dividend Yield | 0.00% | 0.44% | |
| Holdings | 10 | 108 | |
| YTD Return | +34.00% | +19.52% | |
| 1Y Return | +30.45% | +26.68% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +61.12% | +26.64% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +28.20% | +15.36% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 56.2% | 30.6% | |
| Max Drawdown | -78.4% | -83.0% | |
| Fund Family | BMO Capital Markets | Invesco (US) | |
| Category | Alternative | Equity | |
| Inception | Aug 1, 2018 | Mar 10, 1999 |
FNGO vs QQQ Performance
MicroSectors FANG+ Index 2X Leveraged ETN (FNGO) is a ETF from BMO Capital Markets and Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1 (QQQ) is a ETF from Invesco (US). Over the past year FNGO returned +30.45% while QQQ returned +26.68%. Year to date, FNGO is up 34.00% versus a gain of 19.52% for QQQ.
Over three years, FNGO compounded at +61.12% per year against +26.64% for QQQ; over five years the annualized figures are +28.20% and +15.36% respectively. Across the full 8-year window we track, FNGO has the edge at +39.78% annualized vs +13.14%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
FNGO has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 56.2% compared with 30.6% for QQQ. Lower volatility generally means a smoother ride, though it often comes with lower long-run returns.
The deepest peak-to-trough decline in our data was -78.4% for FNGO and -83.0% for QQQ. Drawdown depth is worth weighing if you expect to sell during market stress rather than ride it out.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.90. They move almost in lockstep, so holding both mostly duplicates the same exposure.
Fees and Cost Over Time
FNGO charges 0.95% per year while QQQ charges 0.18%. On a $10,000 position that is $95 vs $18 annually, a gap of $77 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, FNGO currently yields 0.00% against 0.44% for QQQ.
Holdings Overlap
FNGO and QQQ share 10 holdings out of 102 unique holdings combined, representing a 42.8% weight overlap.
Moderate overlap means holding both could provide meaningful diversification benefits.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, FNGO or QQQ?
FNGO has an expense ratio of 0.95% while QQQ charges 0.18%. QQQ is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $77 per year of difference.
Which performed better, FNGO or QQQ?
Over the past year FNGO returned +30.45% vs +26.68% for QQQ, so FNGO leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (8 years), FNGO annualized +39.78% vs +13.14% for QQQ. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, FNGO or QQQ?
FNGO has been the more volatile fund at 56.2% annualized versus 30.6% for QQQ. Worst drawdown: FNGO -78.4% vs QQQ -83.0%.
Should I hold both FNGO and QQQ?
FNGO and QQQ have a monthly-return correlation of 0.90, so they move almost identically. Holding both adds little diversification - most investors pick one, usually on fees or the specific index tracked.
What is the holdings overlap between FNGO and QQQ?
FNGO and QQQ share 10 common holdings with a 42.8% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 102 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, FNGO or QQQ?
FNGO yields 0.00% while QQQ yields 0.44%, so QQQ currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Popular ETF Comparisons
Get Full ETF Analytics
Access complete holdings data, overlap analysis, screener tools, and more with FundXLS.