PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
BULZ vs. NVDL
Performance
Return for Risk
Dividends
Drawdowns
Volatility

Performance

BULZ vs. NVDL - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in MicroSectors Solactive FANG & Innovation 3X Leveraged ETN (BULZ) and GraniteShares 2x Long NVDA Daily ETF (NVDL). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading graphics...

BULZ vs. NVDL - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)2025202420232022
BULZ
MicroSectors Solactive FANG & Innovation 3X Leveraged ETN
-32.23%60.09%54.09%394.22%-25.38%
NVDL
GraniteShares 2x Long NVDA Daily ETF
-17.54%32.57%344.58%432.18%-28.32%

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BULZ achieves a -32.23% return, which is significantly lower than NVDL's -17.54% return.


BULZ

1D
15.12%
1M
-15.60%
YTD
-32.23%
6M
-31.80%
1Y
68.79%
3Y*
56.38%
5Y*
10Y*

NVDL

1D
11.18%
1M
-5.12%
YTD
-17.54%
6M
-22.48%
1Y
94.04%
3Y*
117.57%
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.


BULZ vs. NVDL - Expense Ratio Comparison

BULZ has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is lower than NVDL's 1.15% expense ratio.


Return for Risk

BULZ vs. NVDL — Risk / Return Rank

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

BULZ
BULZ Risk / Return Rank: 5252
Overall Rank
BULZ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4343
Sharpe Ratio Rank
BULZ Sortino Ratio Rank: 6464
Sortino Ratio Rank
BULZ Omega Ratio Rank: 6161
Omega Ratio Rank
BULZ Calmar Ratio Rank: 5252
Calmar Ratio Rank
BULZ Martin Ratio Rank: 3737
Martin Ratio Rank

NVDL
NVDL Risk / Return Rank: 7171
Overall Rank
NVDL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6969
Sharpe Ratio Rank
NVDL Sortino Ratio Rank: 7878
Sortino Ratio Rank
NVDL Omega Ratio Rank: 6969
Omega Ratio Rank
NVDL Calmar Ratio Rank: 8181
Calmar Ratio Rank
NVDL Martin Ratio Rank: 5858
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

BULZ vs. NVDL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for MicroSectors Solactive FANG & Innovation 3X Leveraged ETN (BULZ) and GraniteShares 2x Long NVDA Daily ETF (NVDL). 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.


BULZNVDLDifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

0.75

1.16

-0.41

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

1.54

1.91

-0.37

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

1.21

1.24

-0.03

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

1.21

2.15

-0.94

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

3.28

5.21

-1.93

BULZ vs. NVDL - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BULZ Sharpe Ratio is 0.75, which is lower than the NVDL Sharpe Ratio of 1.16. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BULZ and NVDL, offering insights into how both investments have performed under varying market conditions. These values are calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months.


Loading graphics...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


BULZNVDLDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.75

1.16

-0.41

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

-0.08

1.58

-1.66

Correlation

The correlation between BULZ and NVDL is 0.74, which is considered to be high. That indicates a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Having highly-correlated positions in a portfolio may signal a lack of diversification, potentially leading to increased risk during market downturns.


Dividends

BULZ vs. NVDL - Dividend Comparison

Neither BULZ nor NVDL has paid dividends to shareholders.


TTM202520242023
BULZ
MicroSectors Solactive FANG & Innovation 3X Leveraged ETN
0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
NVDL
GraniteShares 2x Long NVDA Daily ETF
0.00%0.00%0.00%11.29%

Drawdowns

BULZ vs. NVDL - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BULZ drawdown since its inception was -94.44%, which is greater than NVDL's maximum drawdown of -67.55%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BULZ and NVDL.


Loading graphics...

Drawdown Indicators


BULZNVDLDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-94.44%

-67.55%

-26.89%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-54.22%

-42.23%

-11.99%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-49.18%

-35.77%

-13.41%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-60.16%

-17.03%

-43.13%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

20.05%

17.47%

+2.58%

Volatility

BULZ vs. NVDL - Volatility Comparison

MicroSectors Solactive FANG & Innovation 3X Leveraged ETN (BULZ) has a higher volatility of 28.82% compared to GraniteShares 2x Long NVDA Daily ETF (NVDL) at 20.68%. This indicates that BULZ's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than NVDL based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading graphics...

Volatility by Period


BULZNVDLDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

28.82%

20.68%

+8.14%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

60.39%

51.65%

+8.74%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

92.38%

81.88%

+10.50%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

91.57%

91.18%

+0.39%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

91.57%

91.18%

+0.39%