AMDL vs. MSFL

Last updated Jun 3, 2026

AMDL (GraniteShares 2x Long AMD Daily ETF) and MSFL (GraniteShares 2x Long MSFT Daily ETF) are both Leveraged Equities funds from GraniteShares. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, AMDL returned 1145.71% vs -19.41% for MSFL. At a 0.35 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. Both charge a 1.15% expense ratio.

Performance

AMDL vs. MSFL - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in GraniteShares 2x Long AMD Daily ETF (AMDL) and GraniteShares 2x Long MSFT Daily ETF (MSFL). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, AMDL achieves a 357.43% return, which is significantly higher than MSFL's -22.72% return.

AMDL

• 1D: 4.30%
• 1M: 94.72%
• YTD: 357.43%
• 6M: 344.84%
• 1Y: 1,145.71%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

MSFL

• 1D: -8.37%
• 1M: 11.99%
• YTD: -22.72%
• 6M: -25.39%
• 1Y: -19.41%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

AMDL vs. MSFL - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
AMDL GraniteShares 2x Long AMD Daily ETF	357.43%	103.00%	-69.97%
MSFL GraniteShares 2x Long MSFT Daily ETF	-22.72%	16.99%	-9.07%

Correlation

The correlation between AMDL and MSFL is 0.22, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.22
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 19, 2024	0.36

The correlation between AMDL and MSFL shifts across timeframes, from 0.22 (1 year) to 0.35 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

AMDL vs. MSFL - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	AMDL	MSFL
Technology	66.7%	66.6%
Basic Materials	-	-
Communication Services	-	-
Consumer Cyclical	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Energy	-	-
Financial Services	-	-
Healthcare	-	-
Industrials	-	-
Real Estate	-	-
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

AMDL vs. MSFL — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

AMDL

AMDL Risk / Return Rank: 96
AMDL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 99
AMDL Sortino Ratio Rank: 93
AMDL Omega Ratio Rank: 92
AMDL Calmar Ratio Rank: 99
AMDL Martin Ratio Rank: 97

MSFL

MSFL Risk / Return Rank: 6
MSFL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5
MSFL Sortino Ratio Rank: 6
MSFL Omega Ratio Rank: 6
MSFL Calmar Ratio Rank: 6
MSFL Martin Ratio Rank: 5

The rank (0–100) shows how this investment's returns compare to the risk taken. Higher = better. Based on the past 12 months of data, combining Sharpe, Sortino, and other metrics used by quantitative funds and institutional investors.

AMDL vs. MSFL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for GraniteShares 2x Long AMD Daily ETF (AMDL) and GraniteShares 2x Long MSFT Daily ETF (MSFL). Risk-adjusted metrics are performance indicators that assess an investment's returns in relation to its risk, enabling a more accurate comparison of different investment options.

	AMDL	MSFL	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	8.96	-0.39	+9.35
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	4.75	-0.24	+4.99
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.63	0.97	+0.66
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	21.99	-0.32	+22.31
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	43.27	-0.62	+43.89
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

AMDL vs. MSFL - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current AMDL Sharpe Ratio is 8.96, which is higher than the MSFL Sharpe Ratio of -0.39. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of AMDL and MSFL, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	AMDL	MSFL	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	8.96	-0.39	+9.35
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.51	-0.17	+0.68

Drawdowns

AMDL vs. MSFL - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum AMDL drawdown since its inception was -88.63%, which is greater than MSFL's maximum drawdown of -59.39%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for AMDL and MSFL.

Drawdown Indicators

	AMDL	MSFL	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-88.63%	-59.39%	-29.24%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-56.13%	-59.39%	+3.26%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	-39.78%	+39.78%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-48.67%	-21.54%	-27.13%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	28.53%	30.48%	-1.95%

Volatility

AMDL vs. MSFL - Volatility Comparison

GraniteShares 2x Long AMD Daily ETF (AMDL) has a higher volatility of 48.25% compared to GraniteShares 2x Long MSFT Daily ETF (MSFL) at 18.48%. This indicates that AMDL's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than MSFL based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	AMDL	MSFL	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	48.25%	18.48%	+29.77%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	93.85%	44.80%	+49.05%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	129.36%	49.78%	+79.58%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	116.58%	49.45%	+67.13%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	116.58%	49.45%	+67.13%

AMDL vs. MSFL - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both AMDL and MSFL have an expense ratio of 1.15%.

Dividends

AMDL vs. MSFL - Dividend Comparison

Neither AMDL nor MSFL has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both AMDL and MSFL in my portfolio?

AMDL and MSFL have a correlation of 0.22, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, AMDL or MSFL?

AMDL has higher volatility (48.25%) compared to MSFL (18.48%). In terms of maximum drawdown, AMDL dropped -88.63% vs MSFL's -59.39%.

Which ETF is better, AMDL or MSFL?

On 1-year performance, AMDL leads with 1145.71% vs -19.41% for MSFL. Both ETFs have the same 1.15% expense ratio. On volatility, MSFL has been the lower-risk option at 18.48%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, AMDL or MSFL?

Over the 1-year period, AMDL has performed better with a 1145.71% return vs -19.41%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, AMDL or MSFL?

AMDL and MSFL have the same expense ratio: 1.15% per year.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, AMDL or MSFL?

AMDL and MSFL have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

AMDL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (8.96 vs -0.39), meaning it's delivered slightly more return per unit of risk over the trailing 12 months. However, this ranking shifts over time - use the Risk/Return Score above for a more comprehensive view that combines Sharpe, Sortino, and other measures used by quantitative funds.