CRWL vs. AMDL

Last updated Jun 23, 2026

CRWL (GraniteShares 2x Long CRWD Daily ETF) and AMDL (GraniteShares 2x Long AMD Daily ETF) are both Leveraged Equities funds from GraniteShares. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, CRWL returned 36.17% vs 978.63% for AMDL. At a 0.28 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. CRWL charges 1.50%/yr vs 1.15%/yr for AMDL.

Performance

CRWL vs. AMDL - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in GraniteShares 2x Long CRWD Daily ETF (CRWL) and GraniteShares 2x Long AMD Daily ETF (AMDL). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CRWL achieves a 64.57% return, which is significantly lower than AMDL's 386.95% return.

CRWL

• 1D: -2.93%
• 1M: -0.90%
• YTD: 64.57%
• 6M: 53.40%
• 1Y: 36.17%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

AMDL

• 1D: 5.43%
• 1M: 30.82%
• YTD: 386.95%
• 6M: 382.29%
• 1Y: 978.63%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

CRWL vs. AMDL - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
CRWL GraniteShares 2x Long CRWD Daily ETF	64.57%	30.37%	-4.49%
AMDL GraniteShares 2x Long AMD Daily ETF	386.95%	103.00%	-34.92%

Correlation

The correlation between CRWL and AMDL is 0.17, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.17
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 12, 2024	0.28

The correlation between CRWL and AMDL shifts across timeframes, from 0.17 (1 year) to 0.28 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

CRWL vs. AMDL - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	CRWL	AMDL
Technology	66.7%	66.6%
Basic Materials	-	-
Communication Services	-	-
Consumer Cyclical	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Energy	-	-
Financial Services	-	-
Healthcare	-	-
Industrials	-	-
Real Estate	-	-
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

CRWL vs. AMDL — Risk / Return Rank

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

CRWL

CRWL Risk / Return Rank: 17
CRWL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 14
CRWL Sortino Ratio Rank: 22
CRWL Omega Ratio Rank: 22
CRWL Calmar Ratio Rank: 15
CRWL Martin Ratio Rank: 13

AMDL

AMDL Risk / Return Rank: 95
AMDL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 99
AMDL Sortino Ratio Rank: 93
AMDL Omega Ratio Rank: 91
AMDL Calmar Ratio Rank: 98
AMDL Martin Ratio Rank: 96

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.

CRWL vs. AMDL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for GraniteShares 2x Long CRWD Daily ETF (CRWL) and GraniteShares 2x Long AMD Daily ETF (AMDL). 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	AMDL	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.40	7.39	-6.99
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.18	4.31	-3.13
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.15	1.57	-0.42
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.56	17.62	-17.06
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	1.09	34.27	-33.18

CRWL vs. AMDL - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CRWL Sharpe Ratio is 0.40, which is lower than the AMDL Sharpe Ratio of 7.39. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CRWL and AMDL, 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

CRWL vs. AMDL - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CRWL drawdown since its inception was -64.99%, smaller than the maximum AMDL drawdown of -88.63%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CRWL and AMDL.

Drawdown Indicators

	CRWL	AMDL	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-64.99%	-88.63%	+23.64%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-64.99%	-56.13%	-8.86%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-27.43%	-1.66%	-25.77%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-24.73%	-47.80%	+23.07%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	33.20%	28.80%	+4.40%

Volatility

CRWL vs. AMDL - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for GraniteShares 2x Long CRWD Daily ETF (CRWL) is 34.74%, while GraniteShares 2x Long AMD Daily ETF (AMDL) has a volatility of 46.96%. This indicates that CRWL experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than AMDL based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	CRWL	AMDL	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	34.74%	46.96%	-12.22%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	75.79%	101.28%	-25.49%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	91.28%	134.09%	-42.81%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	95.90%	118.34%	-22.44%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	95.90%	118.34%	-22.44%

CRWL vs. AMDL - Expense Ratio Comparison

CRWL has a 1.50% expense ratio, which is higher than AMDL's 1.15% expense ratio.

Dividends

CRWL vs. AMDL - Dividend Comparison

Neither CRWL nor AMDL has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CRWL and AMDL in my portfolio?

CRWL and AMDL have a correlation of 0.17, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, CRWL or AMDL?

AMDL has higher volatility (46.96%) compared to CRWL (34.74%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CRWL dropped -64.99% vs AMDL's -88.63%.

Which ETF is better, CRWL or AMDL?

On 1-year performance, AMDL leads with 978.63% vs 36.17% for CRWL. On fees, AMDL is cheaper at 1.15% per year. On volatility, CRWL has been the lower-risk option at 34.74%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, CRWL or AMDL?

Over the 1-year period, AMDL has performed better with a 978.63% return vs 36.17%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, CRWL or AMDL?

AMDL is cheaper with a 1.15% expense ratio, compared with 1.50% for CRWL.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, CRWL or AMDL?

CRWL and AMDL have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

What is the main difference between CRWL and AMDL?

Their fees differ too: 1.50% for CRWL and 1.15% for AMDL.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

AMDL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (7.39 vs 0.40), 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.