BAR vs. AMDL

Last updated Aug 4, 2026

BAR (GraniteShares Gold Trust) and AMDL (GraniteShares 2x Long AMD Daily ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - BAR is a Gold fund tracking the LBMA Gold Price PM ($/ozt), while AMDL is a Leveraged Equities fund tracking the Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. (200%). Both are passively managed. Over the past year, BAR returned 20.54% vs 337.66% for AMDL. Their 0.17 correlation means their historical movements had little consistent relationship. BAR charges 0.17%/yr vs 1.07%/yr for AMDL.

Performance

BAR vs. AMDL - Performance Comparison

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BAR achieves a -6.10% return, which is significantly lower than AMDL's 242.25% return.

BAR

• 1D: 0.13%
• 1M: -1.60%
• 6M: -12.98%
• YTD: -6.10%
• 1Y: 20.54%
• 3Y*: 27.61%
• 5Y*: 17.26%
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 13.26%

AMDL

• 1D: 2.88%
• 1M: -18.31%
• 6M: 166.77%
• YTD: 242.25%
• 1Y: 337.66%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 36.27%

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
AMDL GraniteShares 2x Long AMD Daily ETF	$183.29M	$203.26M	$349.81M
BAR GraniteShares Gold Trust	$8.15M	$7.49M	$9.63M

BAR vs. AMDL - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
BAR GraniteShares Gold Trust	-6.10%	64.12%	21.49%
AMDL GraniteShares 2x Long AMD Daily ETF	242.25%	103.00%	-69.97%

Correlation

The correlation between BAR and AMDL is 0.29, which is low. Their historical price movements had little consistent relationship.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.29
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 18, 2024	0.17

The correlation between BAR and AMDL shifts across timeframes, from 0.17 (all time) to 0.29 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

BAR vs. AMDL — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

BAR

BAR Risk / Return Rank: 28
BAR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 31
BAR Sortino Ratio Rank: 29
BAR Omega Ratio Rank: 32
BAR Calmar Ratio Rank: 26
BAR Martin Ratio Rank: 23

AMDL

AMDL Risk / Return Rank: 88
AMDL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 91
AMDL Sortino Ratio Rank: 86
AMDL Omega Ratio Rank: 83
AMDL Calmar Ratio Rank: 96
AMDL Martin Ratio Rank: 82

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

BAR vs. AMDL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for GraniteShares Gold Trust (BAR) and GraniteShares 2x Long AMD Daily ETF (AMDL). 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.

	BAR	AMDL	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.74	2.39	-1.65
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.09	2.95	-1.86
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.16	1.36	-0.21
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.78	6.06	-5.28
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	1.68	11.39	-9.71

BAR vs. AMDL - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BAR Sharpe Ratio is 0.74, which is lower than the AMDL Sharpe Ratio of 2.39. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BAR and AMDL, 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

BAR vs. AMDL - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BAR drawdown since its inception was -26.32%, smaller than the maximum AMDL drawdown of -88.63%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BAR and AMDL.

Drawdown Indicators

	BAR	AMDL	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-26.32%	-88.63%	+62.31%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-26.32%	-56.13%	+29.81%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-26.32%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-26.32%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-24.94%	-35.69%	+10.75%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-6.76%	-46.49%	+39.73%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	12.26%	29.82%	-17.56%

Volatility

BAR vs. AMDL - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for GraniteShares Gold Trust (BAR) is 5.98%, while GraniteShares 2x Long AMD Daily ETF (AMDL) has a volatility of 47.95%. This indicates that BAR experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than AMDL based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	BAR	AMDL	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.98%	47.95%	-41.97%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	20.76%	111.57%	-90.81%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	27.90%	142.56%	-114.66%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	18.38%	120.89%	-102.51%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	16.61%	120.89%	-104.28%

BAR vs. AMDL - Expense Ratio Comparison

BAR has a 0.17% expense ratio, which is lower than AMDL's 1.07% expense ratio.

Dividends

BAR vs. AMDL - Dividend Comparison

Neither BAR nor AMDL has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both BAR and AMDL in my portfolio?

BAR and AMDL have a correlation of 0.29, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, BAR or AMDL?

AMDL has higher volatility (47.95%) compared to BAR (5.98%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BAR dropped -26.32% vs AMDL's -88.63%.

Which ETF is better, BAR or AMDL?

On 1-year performance, AMDL leads with 337.66% vs 20.54% for BAR. On fees, BAR is cheaper at 0.17% per year. On volatility, BAR has been the lower-risk option at 5.98%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, BAR or AMDL?

Over the 1-year period, AMDL has performed better with a 337.66% return vs 20.54%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, BAR or AMDL?

BAR is cheaper with a 0.17% expense ratio, compared with 1.07% for AMDL.

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

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

What is the main difference between BAR and AMDL?

BAR is categorized as Gold, while AMDL is Leveraged Equities. BAR tracks LBMA Gold Price PM ($/ozt), while AMDL tracks Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. (200%). Their fees differ too: 0.17% for BAR and 1.07% for AMDL.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

AMDL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.39 vs 0.74), 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.