CONI vs. MSFL

Last updated Jul 17, 2026

CONI (GraniteShares 2x Short COIN Daily ETF) and MSFL (GraniteShares 2x Long MSFT Daily ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - CONI is a Inverse Equities fund actively managed by GraniteShares, while MSFL is a Leveraged Equities fund actively managed by GraniteShares. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, CONI returned 39.67% vs -45.54% for MSFL. At a correlation of -0.36, they often move in opposite directions. Both charge a 1.15% expense ratio.

Performance

CONI vs. MSFL - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in GraniteShares 2x Short COIN Daily ETF (CONI) 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, CONI achieves a -26.58% return, which is significantly higher than MSFL's -37.88% return.

CONI

• 1D: 7.94%
• 1M: 1.63%
• 6M: -13.31%
• YTD: -26.58%
• 1Y: 39.67%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

MSFL

• 1D: 2.74%
• 1M: 1.75%
• 6M: -30.12%
• YTD: -37.88%
• 1Y: -45.54%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

CONI vs. MSFL - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
CONI GraniteShares 2x Short COIN Daily ETF	-26.58%	-70.84%	-53.81%
MSFL GraniteShares 2x Long MSFT Daily ETF	-37.88%	16.99%	1.62%

Correlation

The correlation between CONI and MSFL is -0.35, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.35
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 4, 2024	-0.36

CONI vs. MSFL - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	CONI	MSFL
Financial Services	200.1%	-
Basic Materials	-	-
Communication Services	-	-
Consumer Cyclical	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Energy	-	-
Healthcare	-	-
Industrials	-	-
Real Estate	-	-
Technology	-	66.7%
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

CONI vs. MSFL — Risk / Return Rank

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

CONI

CONI Risk / Return Rank: 21
CONI Sharpe Ratio Rank: 15
CONI Sortino Ratio Rank: 29
CONI Omega Ratio Rank: 30
CONI Calmar Ratio Rank: 17
CONI Martin Ratio Rank: 15

MSFL

MSFL Risk / Return Rank: 3
MSFL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3
MSFL Sortino Ratio Rank: 3
MSFL Omega Ratio Rank: 3
MSFL Calmar Ratio Rank: 3
MSFL Martin Ratio Rank: 3

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.

CONI vs. MSFL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for GraniteShares 2x Short COIN Daily ETF (CONI) 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.

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.

	CONI	MSFL	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.29	-0.84	+1.13
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.34	-1.10	+2.44
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.17	0.86	+0.31
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.53	-0.74	+1.27
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	0.93	-1.28	+2.20

CONI vs. MSFL - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CONI Sharpe Ratio is 0.29, which is higher than the MSFL Sharpe Ratio of -0.84. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CONI 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.

Drawdowns

CONI vs. MSFL - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CONI drawdown since its inception was -94.53%, which is greater than MSFL's maximum drawdown of -62.08%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CONI and MSFL.

Drawdown Indicators

	CONI	MSFL	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-94.53%	-62.08%	-32.45%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-75.12%	-62.08%	-13.04%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-91.00%	-51.59%	-39.41%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-74.20%	-23.16%	-51.04%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	42.89%	35.73%	+7.16%

Volatility

CONI vs. MSFL - Volatility Comparison

GraniteShares 2x Short COIN Daily ETF (CONI) has a higher volatility of 34.37% compared to GraniteShares 2x Long MSFT Daily ETF (MSFL) at 21.11%. This indicates that CONI'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

	CONI	MSFL	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	34.37%	21.11%	+13.26%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	113.00%	49.31%	+63.69%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	135.58%	54.50%	+81.08%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	127.29%	50.61%	+76.68%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	127.29%	50.61%	+76.68%

CONI vs. MSFL - Expense Ratio Comparison

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

Dividends

CONI vs. MSFL - Dividend Comparison

CONI's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.19%, while MSFL has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024
CONI GraniteShares 2x Short COIN Daily ETF	1.19%	0.87%	1.39%
MSFL GraniteShares 2x Long MSFT Daily ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CONI and MSFL in my portfolio?

CONI and MSFL have a correlation of -0.35, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, CONI or MSFL?

CONI has higher volatility (34.37%) compared to MSFL (21.11%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CONI dropped -94.53% vs MSFL's -62.08%.

Which ETF is better, CONI or MSFL?

On 1-year performance, CONI leads with 39.67% vs -45.54% for MSFL. Both ETFs have the same 1.15% expense ratio. On volatility, MSFL has been the lower-risk option at 21.11%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, CONI or MSFL?

Over the 1-year period, CONI has performed better with a 39.67% return vs -45.54%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, CONI or MSFL?

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

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

CONI has the higher dividend yield at 1.19%, compared with 0.00% for MSFL.

What is the main difference between CONI and MSFL?

CONI is categorized as Inverse Equities, while MSFL is Leveraged Equities.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

CONI currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.29 vs -0.84), 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.