CRWL vs. ADBG
CRWL (GraniteShares 2x Long CRWD Daily ETF) and ADBG (Leverage Shares 2X Long ADBE Daily ETF) are both Leveraged Equities funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, CRWL returned 36.17% vs -79.49% for ADBG. At a 0.34 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. CRWL charges 1.50%/yr vs 0.75%/yr for ADBG.
Performance
CRWL vs. ADBG - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, CRWL achieves a 64.57% return, which is significantly higher than ADBG's -73.48% return.
CRWL
- 1D
- -2.93%
- 1M
- -0.90%
- YTD
- 64.57%
- 6M
- 53.40%
- 1Y
- 36.17%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
ADBG
- 1D
- -0.73%
- 1M
- -39.24%
- YTD
- -73.48%
- 6M
- -74.65%
- 1Y
- -79.49%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
CRWL vs. ADBG - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
CRWL GraniteShares 2x Long CRWD Daily ETF | 64.57% | 23.23% |
ADBG Leverage Shares 2X Long ADBE Daily ETF | -73.48% | -29.61% |
Correlation
The correlation between CRWL and ADBG is 0.31, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.31 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 21, 2025 | 0.34 |
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
CRWL vs. ADBG — Risk / Return Rank
CRWL
ADBG
CRWL vs. ADBG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for GraniteShares 2x Long CRWD Daily ETF (CRWL) and Leverage Shares 2X Long ADBE Daily ETF (ADBG). 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.
| CRWL | ADBG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +1.55 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +3.61 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.15 | 0.71 | +0.43 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.56 | -0.98 | +1.54 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 1.09 | -1.70 | +2.79 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
CRWL vs. ADBG - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CRWL drawdown since its inception was -64.99%, smaller than the maximum ADBG drawdown of -83.90%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CRWL and ADBG.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| CRWL | ADBG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -64.99% | -83.90% | +18.91% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -64.99% | -80.96% | +15.97% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -27.43% | -83.90% | +56.47% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -24.73% | -42.93% | +18.20% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 33.20% | 46.82% | -13.62% |
Volatility
CRWL vs. ADBG - Volatility Comparison
GraniteShares 2x Long CRWD Daily ETF (CRWL) has a higher volatility of 34.74% compared to Leverage Shares 2X Long ADBE Daily ETF (ADBG) at 32.27%. This indicates that CRWL's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than ADBG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| CRWL | ADBG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 34.74% | 32.27% | +2.47% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 75.79% | 59.17% | +16.62% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 91.28% | 69.28% | +22.00% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 95.90% | 68.78% | +27.12% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 95.90% | 68.78% | +27.12% |
CRWL vs. ADBG - Expense Ratio Comparison
CRWL has a 1.50% expense ratio, which is higher than ADBG's 0.75% expense ratio.
Dividends
CRWL vs. ADBG - Dividend Comparison
Neither CRWL nor ADBG has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
CRWL and ADBG have a correlation of 0.31, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
CRWL has higher volatility (34.74%) compared to ADBG (32.27%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CRWL dropped -64.99% vs ADBG's -83.90%.
On 1-year performance, CRWL leads with 36.17% vs -79.49% for ADBG. On fees, ADBG is cheaper at 0.75% per year. On volatility, ADBG has been the lower-risk option at 32.27%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, CRWL has performed better with a 36.17% return vs -79.49%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
ADBG is cheaper with a 0.75% expense ratio, compared with 1.50% for CRWL.
CRWL and ADBG have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.
They also come from different issuers: GraniteShares and Leverage Shares. Their fees differ too: 1.50% for CRWL and 0.75% for ADBG.
CRWL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.40 vs -1.15), 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 CRWL and ADBG
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