ASMG vs. INTW

Last updated Jun 21, 2026

ASMG (Leverage Shares 2X Long ASML Daily ETF) and INTW (GraniteShares 2x Long INTC Daily ETF) are both Leveraged Equities funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, ASMG returned 387.26% vs 2051.42% for INTW. At a 0.40 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. ASMG charges 0.75%/yr vs 1.50%/yr for INTW.

Performance

ASMG vs. INTW - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Leverage Shares 2X Long ASML Daily ETF (ASMG) and GraniteShares 2x Long INTC Daily ETF (INTW). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ASMG achieves a 176.84% return, which is significantly lower than INTW's 778.52% return.

ASMG

• 1D: 6.31%
• 1M: 42.03%
• YTD: 176.84%
• 6M: 183.42%
• 1Y: 387.26%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

INTW

• 1D: 20.68%
• 1M: 18.21%
• YTD: 778.52%
• 6M: 776.49%
• 1Y: 2,051.42%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

ASMG vs. INTW - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
ASMG Leverage Shares 2X Long ASML Daily ETF	176.84%	58.08%
INTW GraniteShares 2x Long INTC Daily ETF	778.52%	60.89%

Correlation

The correlation between ASMG and INTW is 0.39, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.39
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 13, 2025	0.40

Return for Risk

ASMG vs. INTW — Risk / Return Rank

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

ASMG

ASMG Risk / Return Rank: 91
ASMG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 97
ASMG Sortino Ratio Rank: 86
ASMG Omega Ratio Rank: 80
ASMG Calmar Ratio Rank: 97
ASMG Martin Ratio Rank: 95

INTW

INTW Risk / Return Rank: 98
INTW Sharpe Ratio Rank: 100
INTW Sortino Ratio Rank: 96
INTW Omega Ratio Rank: 94
INTW Calmar Ratio Rank: 99
INTW Martin Ratio Rank: 99

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.

ASMG vs. INTW - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Leverage Shares 2X Long ASML Daily ETF (ASMG) and GraniteShares 2x Long INTC Daily ETF (INTW). 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.

Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.

	ASMG	INTW	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	4.48	13.34	-8.86
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.68	5.18	-1.49
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.45	1.66	-0.21
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	11.16	40.37	-29.22
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	27.75	91.67	-63.92

ASMG vs. INTW - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ASMG Sharpe Ratio is 4.48, which is lower than the INTW Sharpe Ratio of 13.34. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ASMG and INTW, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

ASMG vs. INTW - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ASMG drawdown since its inception was -43.95%, smaller than the maximum INTW drawdown of -60.58%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ASMG and INTW.

Drawdown Indicators

	ASMG	INTW	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-43.95%	-60.58%	+16.63%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-34.56%	-49.34%	+14.78%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	-2.82%	+2.82%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-12.95%	-29.80%	+16.85%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	13.87%	21.69%	-7.82%

Volatility

ASMG vs. INTW - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Leverage Shares 2X Long ASML Daily ETF (ASMG) is 33.77%, while GraniteShares 2x Long INTC Daily ETF (INTW) has a volatility of 54.63%. This indicates that ASMG experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than INTW based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	ASMG	INTW	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	33.77%	54.63%	-20.86%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	69.51%	118.15%	-48.64%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	86.06%	149.39%	-63.33%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	86.91%	148.63%	-61.72%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	86.91%	148.63%	-61.72%

ASMG vs. INTW - Expense Ratio Comparison

ASMG has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is lower than INTW's 1.50% expense ratio.

Dividends

ASMG vs. INTW - Dividend Comparison

ASMG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.05%, while INTW has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025
ASMG Leverage Shares 2X Long ASML Daily ETF	4.05%	11.20%
INTW GraniteShares 2x Long INTC Daily ETF	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both ASMG and INTW in my portfolio?

ASMG and INTW have a correlation of 0.39, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, ASMG or INTW?

INTW has higher volatility (54.63%) compared to ASMG (33.77%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ASMG dropped -43.95% vs INTW's -60.58%.

Which ETF is better, ASMG or INTW?

On 1-year performance, INTW leads with 2051.42% vs 387.26% for ASMG. On fees, ASMG is cheaper at 0.75% per year. On volatility, ASMG has been the lower-risk option at 33.77%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, ASMG or INTW?

Over the 1-year period, INTW has performed better with a 2051.42% return vs 387.26%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, ASMG or INTW?

ASMG is cheaper with a 0.75% expense ratio, compared with 1.50% for INTW.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, ASMG or INTW?

ASMG has the higher dividend yield at 4.05%, compared with 0.00% for INTW.

What is the main difference between ASMG and INTW?

They also come from different issuers: Leverage Shares and GraniteShares. Their fees differ too: 0.75% for ASMG and 1.50% for INTW.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

INTW currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (13.34 vs 4.48), 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.