CONL vs. ISCMF
CONL (GraniteShares 2x Long COIN Daily ETF) and ISCMF (iShares Diversified Commodity Swap UCITS ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - CONL is a Leveraged Equities fund actively managed by GraniteShares, while ISCMF is a Commodities fund tracking the Bloomberg Commodity Index. CONL is actively managed, while ISCMF is passively managed. Over the past 3 years, CONL returned -32.06%/yr vs 10.24%/yr for ISCMF. Their 0.00 correlation means their historical movements had little consistent relationship. CONL charges 1.04%/yr vs 0.19%/yr for ISCMF.
Performance
CONL vs. ISCMF - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, CONL achieves a -71.60% return, which is significantly lower than ISCMF's 11.96% return.
CONL
- 1D
- -1.65%
- 1M
- -25.98%
- 6M
- -46.60%
- YTD
- -71.60%
- 1Y
- -86.56%
- 3Y*
- -32.06%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- -35.07%
ISCMF
- 1D
- 0.00%
- 1M
- 0.00%
- 6M
- 1.00%
- YTD
- 11.96%
- 1Y
- 26.15%
- 3Y*
- 10.24%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- 3.77%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $84.90M | $86.79M | $121.63M | |
| $0.00 | $7.90K | $54.64K |
CONL vs. ISCMF - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CONL GraniteShares 2x Long COIN Daily ETF | -71.60% | -58.49% | 4.23% | 641.63% | -80.40% |
ISCMF iShares Diversified Commodity Swap UCITS ETF | 11.96% | 19.65% | 3.13% | -9.58% | 0.41% |
Correlation
The correlation between CONL and ISCMF is -0.11, 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. | -0.11 |
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history. | -0.01 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 9, 2022 | 0.00 |
The correlation between CONL and ISCMF shifts across timeframes, from -0.11 (1 year) to 0.00 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
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
CONL vs. ISCMF — Risk / Return Rank
CONL
ISCMF
CONL vs. ISCMF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for GraniteShares 2x Long COIN Daily ETF (CONL) and iShares Diversified Commodity Swap UCITS ETF (ISCMF). 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 | ISCMF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -2.01 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -3.37 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 0.87 | 2.09 | -1.22 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.94 | 1.92 | -2.86 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -1.26 | 5.66 | -6.92 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
CONL vs. ISCMF - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CONL drawdown since its inception was -95.30%, which is greater than ISCMF's maximum drawdown of -25.42%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CONL and ISCMF.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| CONL | ISCMF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -95.30% | -25.42% | -69.88% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -91.79% | -13.68% | -78.11% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -95.30% | -13.68% | -81.62% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -95.12% | -13.68% | -81.44% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -57.58% | -13.31% | -44.27% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 68.49% | 4.64% | +63.85% |
Volatility
CONL vs. ISCMF - Volatility Comparison
GraniteShares 2x Long COIN Daily ETF (CONL) has a higher volatility of 39.68% compared to iShares Diversified Commodity Swap UCITS ETF (ISCMF) at 0.00%. This indicates that CONL's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than ISCMF based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| CONL | ISCMF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 39.68% | 0.00% | +39.68% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 108.50% | 17.04% | +91.46% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 134.44% | 19.57% | +114.87% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 149.22% | 14.72% | +134.50% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 149.22% | 14.72% | +134.50% |
CONL vs. ISCMF - Expense Ratio Comparison
CONL has a 1.04% expense ratio, which is higher than ISCMF's 0.19% expense ratio.
Dividends
CONL vs. ISCMF - Dividend Comparison
Neither CONL nor ISCMF has paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 |
|---|---|---|---|
CONL GraniteShares 2x Long COIN Daily ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.31% |
ISCMF iShares Diversified Commodity Swap UCITS ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
CONL and ISCMF have a correlation of -0.11, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
CONL has higher volatility (39.68%) compared to ISCMF (0.00%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CONL dropped -95.30% vs ISCMF's -25.42%.
On 3-year performance, ISCMF leads with 10.24% vs -32.06% for CONL. On fees, ISCMF is cheaper at 0.19% per year. On volatility, ISCMF has been the lower-risk option at 0.00%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 3-year period, ISCMF has performed better with a 10.24% return vs -32.06%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
ISCMF is cheaper with a 0.19% expense ratio, compared with 1.04% for CONL.
CONL and ISCMF have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.
CONL is categorized as Leveraged Equities, while ISCMF is Commodities. They also come from different issuers: GraniteShares and iShares. Their fees differ too: 1.04% for CONL and 0.19% for ISCMF.
ISCMF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.37 vs -0.65), 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.
Find the right allocation for CONL and ISCMF
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