Screener
NATO vs KONG
Themes Transatlantic Defense ETF vs Formidable Fortress ETF
Key differences
- NATO costs 0.54% less per year.
- NATO is significantly larger than KONG — larger funds tend to be more liquid and less likely to close.
- NATO is classified as equity, while KONG is alternative — different risk/return profiles.
- NATO follows a index tracking strategy; KONG uses option income.
Side-by-side comparison
| NATO | KONG | |
|---|---|---|
| Annual cost (TER) | 0.35% | 0.89% |
| Fund size (AUM) | $99M | $22M |
| Since | 2024 | 2021 |
| Dividend yield | 0.45% | 0.36% |
| Asset class | equity | alternative |
| Region | — | — |
| Strategy | index tracking | option income |
| CAGR 1Y | +23.3% | +7.1% |
| CAGR 3Y | N/A | +9.1% |
| CAGR 5Y | N/A | N/A |
| Sharpe 3Y | N/A | 0.48 |
| Volatility 1Y | 20.70% | 10.90% |
| Max drawdown | -15.99% | -19.98% |
Green dot indicates the better value for that metric. Performance data is historical and does not predict future results.
Similar to NATO and KONG
Explore further