COST vs FNGD: Correlation
How closely do Costco (COST) and MicroSectors FANG Index -3X Inverse Leveraged ETNs due (FNGD) trade together? Their weekly returns over three years give a correlation of -0.28, which is negative.
Data as of 2026-08-27 · refreshed every trading day · weekly returns · methodology
How correlated are COST and FNGD?
Over the past 3 years, COST and FNGD moved with a correlation of -0.28, which is negative, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. The past 12 months show a tighter link (0.17) than the 3-year average (-0.28). Over 5 years the correlation is -0.39, and the annualized covariance of weekly returns is -421.4 %².
FNGD is close to the least connected end of COST's tracked universe, ranking #32 of 33. The last year tells two different stories: COST led by 54.7 percentage points, -1.0% for COST against -55.7% for FNGD. Note the risk asymmetry: FNGD runs 3.8 times the annualized volatility of the other leg, so equal-weighting the two is not an equal-risk position.
How is this computed?
Pearson correlation on weekly returns: ρ(A,B) = cov(rA, rB) / (σA · σB), over windows of 52, 156 and 260 weeks. Covariance is annualized (×52) and expressed in %². Full definitions on the methodology page.
COST vs FNGD: side by side
| COST (Costco) | FNGD (MicroSectors FANG Index -3X Inverse Leveraged ETNs due) | |
|---|---|---|
| 1-year return | -1.0% | -55.7% |
| 5-year return | +116.3% | -99.4% |
| Volatility (ann.) | 19.8% | 75.7% |
| Beta vs S&P 500 | 0.45 | -4.54 |
| Max drawdown (3Y) | -20.7% | -97.6% |
| Market cap | $414.5B | – |
| P/E (trailing) | 48.1 | 20.6 |
| Dividend yield | 0.56% | 0.00% |
| Sector / category | Consumer Staples | US Listed |
Year-by-year returns
| Year | COST | FNGD |
|---|---|---|
| 2022 | -19.0% | +52.2% |
| 2023 | +49.0% | -90.1% |
| 2024 | +39.6% | -76.6% |
| 2025 | -5.4% | -61.4% |
| 2026 | +8.9% | -49.5% |
Calendar-year price returns; the current year is year-to-date as of the data date above.
Are COST and FNGD good diversifiers for each other?
By historical standards, yes. A correlation of -0.28 means the two rarely move for the same reasons.
FAQ
What is the correlation between COST and FNGD?
Using weekly returns as of 2026-08-27: -0.28 over 3 years, with 0.17 over the last year and -0.39 over 5 years.
Is FNGD a good diversifier for COST?
By historical standards, yes. A correlation of -0.28 means the two rarely move for the same reasons.
What does a correlation of -0.28 mean?
Correlation ranges from −1 to +1. Values near +1 mean two assets move together, near 0 that they move independently, and negative values that they tend to move in opposite directions. It measures co-movement, not performance.
Use this data
$ curl https://www.pairbook.io/api/v1/pairs/cost-vs-fngd.json
Embed this badge (it refreshes with the data), with attribution:
[](https://www.pairbook.io/pair/cost-vs-fngd/)
The core API is free. Terms and every endpoint in the API documentation.
Related comparisons
Hubs: COST correlations · FNGD correlations
