COTG vs. MULL

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

COTG (Leverage Shares 2X Long COST Daily ETF) and MULL (GraniteShares 2x Long MU Daily ETF) are both Leveraged Equities funds. Both are actively managed. At a correlation of -0.19, they often move in opposite directions. COTG charges 0.75%/yr vs 1.50%/yr for MULL.

Performance

COTG vs. MULL - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Leverage Shares 2X Long COST Daily ETF (COTG) and GraniteShares 2x Long MU Daily ETF (MULL). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, COTG achieves a 15.84% return, which is significantly lower than MULL's 780.13% return.

COTG

• 1D: 1.52%
• 1M: -14.19%
• YTD: 15.84%
• 6M: 17.42%
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

MULL

• 1D: -26.45%
• 1M: 69.00%
• YTD: 780.13%
• 6M: 832.94%
• 1Y: 3,622.12%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

COTG vs. MULL - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
COTG Leverage Shares 2X Long COST Daily ETF	15.84%	-22.61%
MULL GraniteShares 2x Long MU Daily ETF	780.13%	168.44%

Correlation

The correlation between COTG and MULL is -0.19, 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 (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 18, 2025	-0.19

Return for Risk

COTG vs. MULL — Risk / Return Rank

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

COTG

Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.

MULL

MULL Risk / Return Rank: 98
MULL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 100
MULL Sortino Ratio Rank: 96
MULL Omega Ratio Rank: 95
MULL Calmar Ratio Rank: 100
MULL 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.

COTG vs. MULL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Leverage Shares 2X Long COST Daily ETF (COTG) 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.

	COTG	MULL	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	—	25.24	—
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	—	5.61	—
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	—	1.71	—
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	—	69.24	—
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	—	221.31	—

Drawdowns

COTG vs. MULL - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum COTG drawdown since its inception was -25.69%, smaller than the maximum MULL drawdown of -72.29%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for COTG and MULL.

Drawdown Indicators

	COTG	MULL	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-25.69%	-72.29%	+46.60%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	—	-53.09%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-24.45%	-26.45%	+2.00%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-9.72%	-20.52%	+10.80%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	—	16.58%	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	COTG	MULL	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	—	74.91%	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	—	119.83%	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	40.02%	145.72%	-105.70%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	40.02%	142.49%	-102.47%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	40.02%	142.49%	-102.47%

COTG vs. MULL - Expense Ratio Comparison

COTG has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is lower than MULL's 1.50% expense ratio.

Dividends

COTG vs. MULL - Dividend Comparison

COTG has not paid dividends to shareholders, while MULL's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.04%.

Position	TTM	2025
COTG Leverage Shares 2X Long COST Daily ETF	0.00%	0.00%
MULL GraniteShares 2x Long MU Daily ETF	0.04%	0.39%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both COTG and MULL in my portfolio?

COTG and MULL have a correlation of -0.19, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, COTG or MULL?

On fees, COTG is cheaper at 0.75% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, COTG or MULL?

COTG is cheaper with a 0.75% expense ratio, compared with 1.50% for MULL.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, COTG or MULL?

MULL has the higher dividend yield at 0.04%, compared with 0.00% for COTG.

What is the main difference between COTG and MULL?

They also come from different issuers: Leverage Shares and GraniteShares. Their fees differ too: 0.75% for COTG and 1.50% for MULL.