CONL vs. MSTZ

Last updated Jul 14, 2026

CONL (GraniteShares 2x Long COIN Daily ETF) and MSTZ (T-REX 2X Inverse MSTR Daily Target ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - CONL is a Leveraged Equities fund actively managed by GraniteShares, while MSTZ is a Inverse Equities fund actively managed by REX. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, CONL returned -91.24% vs 282.56% for MSTZ. At a correlation of -0.72, they often move in opposite directions. CONL charges 1.15%/yr vs 1.05%/yr for MSTZ.

Performance

CONL vs. MSTZ - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in GraniteShares 2x Long COIN Daily ETF (CONL) and T-REX 2X Inverse MSTR Daily Target ETF (MSTZ). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CONL achieves a -66.89% return, which is significantly lower than MSTZ's -23.27% return.

CONL

• 1D: -2.02%
• 1M: -6.91%
• 6M: -70.98%
• YTD: -66.89%
• 1Y: -91.24%
• 3Y*: -35.14%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

MSTZ

• 1D: 5.07%
• 1M: 46.38%
• 6M: -9.68%
• YTD: -23.27%
• 1Y: 282.56%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

CONL vs. MSTZ - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
CONL GraniteShares 2x Long COIN Daily ETF	-66.89%	-58.49%	67.25%
MSTZ T-REX 2X Inverse MSTR Daily Target ETF	-23.27%	-38.95%	-94.43%

Correlation

The correlation between CONL and MSTZ is -0.79, 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	-0.79
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 18, 2024	-0.72

The correlation between CONL and MSTZ has been stable across timeframes, ranging from -0.79 to -0.72 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

CONL vs. MSTZ — Risk / Return Rank

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

CONL

CONL Risk / Return Rank: 2
CONL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4
CONL Sortino Ratio Rank: 1
CONL Omega Ratio Rank: 2
CONL Calmar Ratio Rank: 0
CONL Martin Ratio Rank: 3

MSTZ

MSTZ Risk / Return Rank: 68
MSTZ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 76
MSTZ Sortino Ratio Rank: 67
MSTZ Omega Ratio Rank: 68
MSTZ Calmar Ratio Rank: 80
MSTZ Martin Ratio Rank: 49

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. MSTZ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for GraniteShares 2x Long COIN Daily ETF (CONL) and T-REX 2X Inverse MSTR Daily Target ETF (MSTZ). 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	MSTZ	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.68	1.92	-2.60
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-1.59	2.45	-4.05
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.82	1.32	-0.50
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.97	3.35	-4.33
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-1.27	6.53	-7.79

CONL vs. MSTZ - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CONL Sharpe Ratio is -0.68, which is lower than the MSTZ Sharpe Ratio of 1.92. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CONL and MSTZ, 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. MSTZ - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CONL drawdown since its inception was -95.20%, roughly equal to the maximum MSTZ drawdown of -99.38%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CONL and MSTZ.

Drawdown Indicators

	CONL	MSTZ	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-95.20%	-99.38%	+4.18%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-93.67%	-84.89%	-8.78%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-95.20%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-94.31%	-97.39%	+3.08%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-56.95%	-94.53%	+37.58%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	72.04%	43.51%	+28.53%

Volatility

CONL vs. MSTZ - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for GraniteShares 2x Long COIN Daily ETF (CONL) is 33.61%, while T-REX 2X Inverse MSTR Daily Target ETF (MSTZ) has a volatility of 56.56%. This indicates that CONL experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than MSTZ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	CONL	MSTZ	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	33.61%	56.56%	-22.95%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	104.56%	135.11%	-30.55%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	134.25%	148.53%	-14.28%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	149.29%	171.02%	-21.73%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	149.29%	171.02%	-21.73%

CONL vs. MSTZ - Expense Ratio Comparison

CONL has a 1.15% expense ratio, which is higher than MSTZ's 1.05% expense ratio.

Dividends

CONL vs. MSTZ - Dividend Comparison

Neither CONL nor MSTZ has paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024
CONL GraniteShares 2x Long COIN Daily ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.31%
MSTZ T-REX 2X Inverse MSTR Daily Target ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CONL and MSTZ in my portfolio?

CONL and MSTZ have a correlation of -0.79, 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 MSTZ?

MSTZ has higher volatility (56.56%) compared to CONL (33.61%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CONL dropped -95.20% vs MSTZ's -99.38%.

Which ETF is better, CONL or MSTZ?

On 1-year performance, MSTZ leads with 282.56% vs -91.24% for CONL. On fees, MSTZ is cheaper at 1.05% per year. On volatility, CONL has been the lower-risk option at 33.61%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, CONL or MSTZ?

Over the 1-year period, MSTZ has performed better with a 282.56% return vs -91.24%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, CONL or MSTZ?

MSTZ is cheaper with a 1.05% expense ratio, compared with 1.15% for CONL.

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

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

What is the main difference between CONL and MSTZ?

CONL is categorized as Leveraged Equities, while MSTZ is Inverse Equities. They also come from different issuers: GraniteShares and REX. Their fees differ too: 1.15% for CONL and 1.05% for MSTZ.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

MSTZ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.92 vs -0.68), 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.