CONL vs. INTW

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

CONL (GraniteShares 2x Long COIN Daily ETF) and INTW (GraniteShares 2x Long INTC Daily ETF) are both Leveraged Equities funds from GraniteShares. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, CONL returned -86.06% vs 1964.55% for INTW. At a 0.29 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. CONL charges 1.15%/yr vs 1.50%/yr for INTW.

Performance

CONL vs. INTW - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in GraniteShares 2x Long COIN Daily ETF (CONL) 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, CONL achieves a -65.46% return, which is significantly lower than INTW's 750.22% return.

CONL

• 1D: -7.83%
• 1M: -30.11%
• YTD: -65.46%
• 6M: -70.11%
• 1Y: -86.06%
• 3Y*: -14.86%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

INTW

• 1D: -12.49%
• 1M: 12.21%
• YTD: 750.22%
• 6M: 775.58%
• 1Y: 1,964.55%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

CONL vs. INTW - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
CONL GraniteShares 2x Long COIN Daily ETF	-65.46%	-64.00%
INTW GraniteShares 2x Long INTC Daily ETF	750.22%	60.89%

Correlation

The correlation between CONL and INTW is 0.27, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.27
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 13, 2025	0.29

CONL vs. INTW - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	CONL	INTW
Financial Services	100.0%	-
Basic Materials	-	-
Communication Services	-	-
Consumer Cyclical	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Energy	-	-
Healthcare	-	-
Industrials	-	-
Real Estate	-	-
Technology	-	66.7%
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

CONL vs. INTW — Risk / Return Rank

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

CONL

CONL Risk / Return Rank: 3
CONL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4
CONL Sortino Ratio Rank: 3
CONL Omega Ratio Rank: 3
CONL Calmar Ratio Rank: 1
CONL Martin Ratio Rank: 3

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.

CONL vs. INTW - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

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

	CONL	INTW	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.63	13.25	-13.89
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-1.10	5.13	-6.23
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.88	1.65	-0.77
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.93	40.32	-41.25
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-1.25	91.49	-92.74

CONL vs. INTW - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CONL Sharpe Ratio is -0.63, which is lower than the INTW Sharpe Ratio of 13.25. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CONL 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

CONL vs. INTW - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CONL drawdown since its inception was -94.36%, which is greater than INTW's maximum drawdown of -60.58%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CONL and INTW.

Drawdown Indicators

	CONL	INTW	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-94.36%	-60.58%	-33.78%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-92.57%	-49.34%	-43.23%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-94.36%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-94.06%	-12.49%	-81.57%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-56.45%	-29.66%	-26.79%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	68.94%	21.70%	+47.24%

Volatility

CONL vs. INTW - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for GraniteShares 2x Long COIN Daily ETF (CONL) is 36.69%, while GraniteShares 2x Long INTC Daily ETF (INTW) has a volatility of 55.81%. This indicates that CONL 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

	CONL	INTW	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	36.69%	55.81%	-19.12%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	102.83%	119.10%	-16.27%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	135.85%	150.14%	-14.29%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	149.59%	148.88%	+0.71%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	149.59%	148.88%	+0.71%

CONL vs. INTW - Expense Ratio Comparison

CONL has a 1.15% expense ratio, which is lower than INTW's 1.50% expense ratio.

Dividends

CONL vs. INTW - Dividend Comparison

Neither CONL nor INTW has paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024
CONL GraniteShares 2x Long COIN Daily ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.31%
INTW GraniteShares 2x Long INTC Daily ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CONL and INTW in my portfolio?

CONL and INTW have a correlation of 0.27, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, CONL or INTW?

INTW has higher volatility (55.81%) compared to CONL (36.69%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CONL dropped -94.36% vs INTW's -60.58%.

Which ETF is better, CONL or INTW?

On 1-year performance, INTW leads with 1964.55% vs -86.06% for CONL. On fees, CONL is cheaper at 1.15% per year. On volatility, CONL has been the lower-risk option at 36.69%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, CONL or INTW?

Over the 1-year period, INTW has performed better with a 1964.55% return vs -86.06%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, CONL or INTW?

CONL is cheaper with a 1.15% expense ratio, compared with 1.50% for INTW.

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

CONL and INTW have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

What is the main difference between CONL and INTW?

Their fees differ too: 1.15% for CONL and 1.50% for INTW.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

INTW currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (13.25 vs -0.63), 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.