FNGD vs M: Correlation
MicroSectors FANG Index -3X Inverse Leveraged ETNs due (FNGD) and Macy's Inc (M) show a negative relationship: their 3-year correlation of weekly returns is -0.20.
Data as of 2026-08-27 · refreshed every trading day · weekly returns · methodology
How correlated are FNGD and M?
On 3 years of weekly data the FNGD/M correlation comes out at -0.20, negative, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. The link has tightened recently: the 1-year correlation (-0.04) runs above the 3-year figure (-0.20). The 5-year figure is -0.34, and annualized covariance runs at -754.7 %².
By 3-year correlation, M places #90 of the 1743 assets tracked against FNGD. Correlation aside, the last 12 months split them widely, with M ahead by 127.5 points (-55.7% versus +71.8%). One caveat on sizing: FNGD is 1.5 times as volatile as the other leg, so an equal-dollar split is far from equal-risk.
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.
FNGD vs M: side by side
| FNGD (MicroSectors FANG Index -3X Inverse Leveraged ETNs due) | M (Macy's Inc) | |
|---|---|---|
| 1-year return | -55.7% | +71.8% |
| 5-year return | -99.4% | +21.5% |
| Volatility (ann.) | 75.7% | 49.3% |
| Beta vs S&P 500 | -4.54 | 1.06 |
| Max drawdown (3Y) | -97.6% | -51.3% |
| Market cap | – | $5.9B |
| P/E (trailing) | 20.6 | 9.4 |
| Dividend yield | 0.00% | 3.24% |
| Sector / category | US Listed | US Listed |
Year-by-year returns
| Year | FNGD | M |
|---|---|---|
| 2022 | +52.2% | -18.7% |
| 2023 | -90.1% | +1.6% |
| 2024 | -76.6% | -12.4% |
| 2025 | -61.4% | +36.5% |
| 2026 | -49.5% | +4.0% |
Calendar-year price returns; the current year is year-to-date as of the data date above.
Are FNGD and M good diversifiers for each other?
By historical standards, yes. A correlation of -0.20 means the two rarely move for the same reasons.
FAQ
What is the correlation between FNGD and M?
Using weekly returns as of 2026-08-27: -0.20 over 3 years, with -0.04 over the last year and -0.34 over 5 years.
Is M a good diversifier for FNGD?
By historical standards, yes. A correlation of -0.20 means the two rarely move for the same reasons.
What does a correlation of -0.20 mean?
On the −1 to +1 scale, -0.20 describes how much the two returns move together: +1 is lockstep, 0 is independence, negative values mean opposite directions. It says nothing about which performed better.
Use this data
$ curl https://www.pairbook.io/api/v1/pairs/fngd-vs-m.json
Embed this badge (it refreshes with the data), with attribution:
[](https://www.pairbook.io/pair/fngd-vs-m/)
No key needed, free to use. Full endpoint list in the API documentation.
Related comparisons
Hubs: FNGD correlations · M correlations
