CRWL vs. INTW

Last updated Jun 23, 2026

CRWL (GraniteShares 2x Long CRWD Daily ETF) and INTW (GraniteShares 2x Long INTC Daily ETF) are both Leveraged Equities funds from GraniteShares. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, CRWL returned 36.17% vs 2279.34% for INTW. At a 0.22 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. Both charge a 1.50% expense ratio.

Performance

CRWL vs. INTW - 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 INTC Daily ETF (INTW). 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 INTW's 871.59% return.

CRWL

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

INTW

• 1D: 10.59%
• 1M: 28.23%
• YTD: 871.59%
• 6M: 897.00%
• 1Y: 2,279.34%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

CRWL vs. INTW - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
CRWL GraniteShares 2x Long CRWD Daily ETF	64.57%	-16.45%
INTW GraniteShares 2x Long INTC Daily ETF	871.59%	60.89%

Correlation

The correlation between CRWL and INTW is 0.19, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.19
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 13, 2025	0.22

CRWL vs. INTW - Sectors Allocation Comparison

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

Return for Risk

CRWL vs. INTW — 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

INTW

INTW Risk / Return Rank: 98
INTW Sharpe Ratio Rank: 100
INTW Sortino Ratio Rank: 96
INTW Omega Ratio Rank: 95
INTW Calmar Ratio Rank: 99
INTW 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.

CRWL vs. INTW - 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 INTC Daily ETF (INTW). 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	INTW	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.40	15.45	-15.05
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.18	5.37	-4.19
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.15	1.68	-0.54
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.56	46.81	-46.25
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	1.09	106.28	-105.19

CRWL vs. INTW - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CRWL Sharpe Ratio is 0.40, which is lower than the INTW Sharpe Ratio of 15.45. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CRWL and INTW, 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. INTW - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CRWL drawdown since its inception was -64.99%, which is greater than INTW's maximum drawdown of -60.58%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CRWL and INTW.

Drawdown Indicators

	CRWL	INTW	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-64.99%	-60.58%	-4.41%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-64.99%	-49.34%	-15.65%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-27.43%	0.00%	-27.43%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-24.73%	-29.71%	+4.98%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	33.20%	21.69%	+11.51%

Volatility

CRWL vs. INTW - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for GraniteShares 2x Long CRWD Daily ETF (CRWL) is 34.74%, while GraniteShares 2x Long INTC Daily ETF (INTW) has a volatility of 53.88%. This indicates that CRWL experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than INTW based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	CRWL	INTW	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	34.74%	53.88%	-19.14%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	75.79%	118.13%	-42.34%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	91.28%	149.77%	-58.49%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	95.90%	148.63%	-52.73%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	95.90%	148.63%	-52.73%

CRWL vs. INTW - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both CRWL and INTW have an expense ratio of 1.50%.

Dividends

CRWL vs. INTW - Dividend Comparison

Neither CRWL nor INTW has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CRWL and INTW in my portfolio?

CRWL and INTW 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 is riskier, CRWL or INTW?

INTW has higher volatility (53.88%) compared to CRWL (34.74%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CRWL dropped -64.99% vs INTW's -60.58%.

Which ETF is better, CRWL or INTW?

On 1-year performance, INTW leads with 2279.34% vs 36.17% for CRWL. Both ETFs have the same 1.50% expense ratio. 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 INTW?

Over the 1-year period, INTW has performed better with a 2279.34% 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 INTW?

CRWL and INTW have the same expense ratio: 1.50% per year.

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

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

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

INTW currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (15.45 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.