CRWL vs. BMNG
CRWL (GraniteShares 2x Long CRWD Daily ETF) and BMNG (Leverage Shares 2X Long BMNR Daily ETF) are both Leveraged Equities funds. Both are actively managed. At a 0.26 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. CRWL charges 1.50%/yr vs 0.75%/yr for BMNG.
Performance
CRWL vs. BMNG - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, CRWL achieves a 64.32% return, which is significantly higher than BMNG's -78.43% return.
CRWL
- 1D
- -13.60%
- 1M
- 93.76%
- YTD
- 64.32%
- 6M
- 35.82%
- 1Y
- 42.83%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
BMNG
- 1D
- -22.44%
- 1M
- -55.66%
- YTD
- -78.43%
- 6M
- -87.34%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
CRWL vs. BMNG - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
CRWL GraniteShares 2x Long CRWD Daily ETF | 64.32% | -25.57% |
BMNG Leverage Shares 2X Long BMNR Daily ETF | -78.43% | -81.37% |
Correlation
The correlation between CRWL and BMNG is 0.26, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 28, 2025 | 0.26 |
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. BMNG — Risk / Return Rank
CRWL
BMNG
CRWL vs. BMNG - 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 BMNR Daily ETF (BMNG). 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.
| CRWL | BMNG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.16 | — | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.66 | — | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 1.31 | — | — |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| CRWL | BMNG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.48 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.60 | -0.52 | +1.11 |
Drawdowns
CRWL vs. BMNG - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CRWL drawdown since its inception was -64.99%, smaller than the maximum BMNG drawdown of -95.98%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CRWL and BMNG.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| CRWL | BMNG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -64.99% | -95.98% | +30.99% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -64.99% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -27.54% | -95.98% | +68.44% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -24.73% | -81.57% | +56.84% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 32.75% | — | — |
Volatility
CRWL vs. BMNG - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| CRWL | BMNG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 36.94% | — | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 75.48% | — | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 90.16% | 193.00% | -102.84% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 96.42% | 193.00% | -96.58% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 96.42% | 193.00% | -96.58% |
CRWL vs. BMNG - Expense Ratio Comparison
CRWL has a 1.50% expense ratio, which is higher than BMNG's 0.75% expense ratio.
Dividends
CRWL vs. BMNG - Dividend Comparison
Neither CRWL nor BMNG has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
CRWL and BMNG have a correlation of 0.26, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, BMNG is cheaper at 0.75% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
BMNG is cheaper with a 0.75% expense ratio, compared with 1.50% for CRWL.
CRWL and BMNG 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 BMNG.
Find the right allocation for CRWL and BMNG
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