PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
CONI vs. MULL
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

CONI vs. MULL - 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 MU Daily ETF (MULL). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CONI achieves a -20.46% return, which is significantly lower than MULL's 359.36% return.


CONI

1D
20.89%
1M
13.11%
6M
-35.87%
YTD
-20.46%
1Y
3.74%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
ALL TIME*
-69.09%

MULL

1D
-11.97%
1M
-36.10%
6M
129.44%
YTD
359.36%
1Y
2,639.01%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
ALL TIME*
446.67%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Liquidity Comparison


PositionAvg. Volume Value (2W)Avg. Volume Value (1M)Avg. Volume Value (3M)
$8.69M$7.39M$8.65M
$191.48M$219.09M$265.13M

CONI vs. MULL - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024
CONI
GraniteShares 2x Short COIN Daily ETF
-20.46%-70.84%21.25%
MULL
GraniteShares 2x Long MU Daily ETF
359.36%558.51%-39.23%

Correlation

The correlation between CONI and MULL is -0.33, meaning they have often moved in opposite directions in the past. This relationship can weaken or reverse as market conditions change.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.

-0.33

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 12, 2024

-0.35

CONI vs. MULL - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
CONI
MULL

Financial Services

200.0%

-

Basic Materials

-

-

Communication Services

-

-

Consumer Cyclical

-

-

Consumer Defensive

-

-

Energy

-

-

Healthcare

-

-

Industrials

-

-

Real Estate

-

-

Technology

-

66.7%

Utilities

-

-

Financial Services

CONI
200.0%
MULL

-

Basic Materials

CONI

-

MULL

-

Communication Services

CONI

-

MULL

-

Consumer Cyclical

CONI

-

MULL

-

Consumer Defensive

CONI

-

MULL

-

Energy

CONI

-

MULL

-

Healthcare

CONI

-

MULL

-

Industrials

CONI

-

MULL

-

Real Estate

CONI

-

MULL

-

Technology

CONI

-

MULL
66.7%

Utilities

CONI

-

MULL

-

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

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


Return for Risk

CONI vs. MULL — Risk / Return Rank

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

CONI
CONI Risk / Return Rank: 2525
Overall Rank
CONI Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1717
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CONI Sortino Ratio Rank: 3636
Sortino Ratio Rank
CONI Omega Ratio Rank: 3636
Omega Ratio Rank
CONI Calmar Ratio Rank: 2020
Calmar Ratio Rank
CONI Martin Ratio Rank: 1717
Martin Ratio Rank

MULL
MULL Risk / Return Rank: 9898
Overall Rank
MULL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 100100
Sharpe Ratio Rank
MULL Sortino Ratio Rank: 9797
Sortino Ratio Rank
MULL Omega Ratio Rank: 9696
Omega Ratio Rank
MULL Calmar Ratio Rank: 9999
Calmar Ratio Rank
MULL Martin Ratio Rank: 9999
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

CONI vs. MULL - 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 MU Daily ETF (MULL). 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.


CONIMULLDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-14.81

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-3.42

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.17

1.59

-0.42

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

0.50

35.94

-35.44

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

0.84

118.66

-117.83

CONI vs. MULL - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CONI Sharpe Ratio is 0.27, which is lower than the MULL Sharpe Ratio of 15.08. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CONI and MULL, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Drawdowns

CONI vs. MULL - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CONI drawdown since its inception was -94.53%, which is greater than MULL's maximum drawdown of -72.29%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CONI and MULL.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


CONIMULLDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-94.53%

-72.29%

-22.24%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-75.12%

-68.16%

-6.96%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-90.25%

-61.61%

-28.64%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-74.60%

-21.86%

-52.74%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

45.08%

20.61%

+24.47%

Volatility

CONI vs. MULL - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for GraniteShares 2x Short COIN Daily ETF (CONI) is 40.36%, while GraniteShares 2x Long MU Daily ETF (MULL) has a volatility of 61.67%. This indicates that CONI experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than MULL based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


CONIMULLDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

40.36%

61.67%

-21.31%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

116.67%

135.25%

-18.58%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

139.37%

162.81%

-23.44%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

128.42%

149.74%

-21.32%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

128.42%

149.74%

-21.32%

CONI vs. MULL - Expense Ratio Comparison

CONI has a 1.15% expense ratio, which is lower than MULL's 1.50% expense ratio.


Dividends

CONI vs. MULL - Dividend Comparison

CONI's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.10%, more than MULL's 0.08% yield.


PositionTTM20252024
CONI
GraniteShares 2x Short COIN Daily ETF
1.10%0.87%1.39%
MULL
GraniteShares 2x Long MU Daily ETF
0.08%0.39%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


CONI and MULL have a correlation of -0.33, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

MULL has higher volatility (61.67%) compared to CONI (40.36%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CONI dropped -94.53% vs MULL's -72.29%.

On 1-year performance, MULL leads with 2639.01% vs 3.74% for CONI. On fees, CONI is cheaper at 1.15% per year. On volatility, CONI has been the lower-risk option at 40.36%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, MULL has performed better with a 2639.01% return vs 3.74%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

CONI is cheaper with a 1.15% expense ratio, compared with 1.50% for MULL.

CONI has the higher dividend yield at 1.10%, compared with 0.08% for MULL.

CONI is categorized as Inverse Equities, while MULL is Leveraged Equities. Their fees differ too: 1.15% for CONI and 1.50% for MULL.

MULL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (15.08 vs 0.27), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for CONI and MULL

Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.

Open Portfolio Optimizer