FNGU vs IVV
MicroSectors FANG+ 3x Leveraged ETN vs iShares Core S&P 500 ETF
Which is better, FNGU or IVV?
Multi Alternative against Large Cap Blend.
IVV has a lower expense ratio. FNGU led over 1Y and the full window. IVV is less concentrated, with 38.9% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 100.0%.
MarketXLS is not an investment adviser. This comparison is generated automatically from market data and is for information only. A Best mark means the better reading on that one measure, not a recommendation to buy.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | FNGU | IVV |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.35% | 0.03%Best |
| AUM | $2.9B | $896.5B |
| Dividend Yield | 0.00% | 1.10% |
| Holdings | 10 | 508 |
| YTD Return | +42.02%Best | +13.59% |
| 1Y Return | +21.65%Best | +17.54% |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | - | +22.46% |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | - | +13.28% |
| Volatility (annualized) | 79.7% | 12.8%Best |
| Max Drawdown | -60.8% | -18.4%Best |
| $10,000 over 1.6 years | $14,006Best | $12,780 |
| Top 10 Weight | 100.0% | 38.9%Best |
| Fund Family | BMO Capital Markets | iShares by BlackRock (US) |
| Category | Alternative | Equity |
| Style | Multi Alternative | Large Cap Blend |
| Inception | Feb 19, 2025 | May 15, 2000 |
Volatility and max drawdown, and the $10,000 over 1.6 years row, are measured over the window both funds cover: Feb 20, 2025 to Oct 14, 2026 (1.6 years).
FNGU vs IVV growth
Month-end closes. Both lines start at 0% in the first month shown, so the gap between them is the difference in growth across that window. The full view covers the 1.6 years both funds cover.
FNGU vs IVV Performance
MicroSectors FANG+ 3x Leveraged ETN (FNGU) is an ETF from BMO Capital Markets and iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is an ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US). Over the past year FNGU returned +21.65% while IVV returned +17.54%. Year to date, FNGU is up 42.02% versus a gain of 13.59% for IVV.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
FNGU has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 79.7% compared with 12.8% for IVV. 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 -60.8% for FNGU and -18.4% for IVV. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.89. They usually move together, but the gap leaves some room for diversification.
Fees and Cost Over Time
FNGU charges 0.35% per year while IVV charges 0.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $35 vs $3 annually, a gap of $32 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, FNGU currently yields 0.00% against 1.10% for IVV.
Holdings Overlap
100.0% of FNGU's money is in holdings IVV also owns. 36.0% of IVV's money is in holdings FNGU also owns.
Most of FNGU is already inside IVV. Owning both mostly buys the same companies twice.
10 positions in common, counted across the 10 positions we hold weights for in FNGU and 506 in IVV, against full books of 10 and 508.
What only one of them owns
Measured across the 10 and 506 positions we hold weights for.
IVV holds 490 positions FNGU does not, 63.4% of the fund.
Largest: GOOG 2.41%, AMD 1.52%, TSLA 1.51%, BRK.B 1.41%, LLY 1.39%
Top Shared Holdings
| Stock | Weight in FNGU | Weight in IVV | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| NVDANvidia Corp | 10.29% | 8.44% | 1.85% |
| AAPLApple, Inc | 9.65% | 7.29% | 2.36% |
| MSFTMicrosoft Corp | 10.08% | 5.76% | 4.32% |
| AMZNAmazon.Com Inc | 9.76% | 3.68% | 6.08% |
| MUMicron Technology, Inc. | 11.08% | 1.87% | 9.21% |
| METAMeta Platforms Inc | 10.38% | 2.42% | 7.96% |
| GOOGLAlphabet Inc | 9.67% | 3.00% | 6.67% |
| AVGOBroadcom Inc | 9.97% | 2.47% | 7.50% |
| PLTRPalantir Technologies Inc | 10.34% | 0.66% | 9.68% |
| NFLXNetflix, Inc. | 8.78% | 0.43% | 8.35% |
100.0% of FNGU is already inside IVV.
You probably hold more than these two. Add the rest and see how much of the whole book is the same companies twice.
Free for up to 10 holdings. No account needed.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, FNGU or IVV?
FNGU has an expense ratio of 0.35% while IVV charges 0.03%. IVV is the cheaper option, by $32 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, FNGU or IVV?
Over the past year FNGU returned +21.65% vs +17.54% for IVV, so FNGU leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (2 years), FNGU annualized +23.44% vs +16.57% for IVV. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, FNGU or IVV?
FNGU has been the more volatile fund at 79.7% annualized versus 12.8% for IVV. Worst drawdown: FNGU -60.8% vs IVV -18.4%.
Should I hold both FNGU and IVV?
FNGU and IVV have a monthly-return correlation of 0.89, so their returns are far enough apart for the mix to behave differently from either one alone. This is information, not a recommendation.
What is the holdings overlap between FNGU and IVV?
100.0% of FNGU's money is in holdings IVV also owns. 36.0% of IVV's is in holdings FNGU also owns. They hold 10 positions in common, counted across the 10 positions we hold weights for in FNGU and 506 in IVV.
Which pays a higher dividend, FNGU or IVV?
FNGU yields 0.00% while IVV yields 1.10%, so IVV currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is IVV better than FNGU?
IVV has a lower expense ratio. FNGU led over 1Y and the full window. IVV is less concentrated, with 38.9% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 100.0%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.