EZJ vs. INTW

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

EZJ (ProShares Ultra MSCI Japan) and INTW (GraniteShares 2x Long INTC Daily ETF) are both Leveraged Equities funds. EZJ is passively managed, while INTW is actively managed. Over the past year, EZJ returned 58.99% vs 1596.33% for INTW. At a 0.32 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. EZJ charges 0.95%/yr vs 1.50%/yr for INTW.

Performance

EZJ vs. INTW - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in ProShares Ultra MSCI Japan (EZJ) 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, EZJ achieves a 29.29% return, which is significantly lower than INTW's 552.98% return.

EZJ

• 1D: 0.39%
• 1M: 10.56%
• YTD: 29.29%
• 6M: 28.96%
• 1Y: 58.99%
• 3Y*: 26.09%
• 5Y*: 7.76%
• 10Y*: 10.56%

INTW

• 1D: -1.47%
• 1M: 1.09%
• YTD: 552.98%
• 6M: 433.74%
• 1Y: 1,596.33%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

EZJ vs. INTW - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
EZJ ProShares Ultra MSCI Japan	29.29%	35.62%
INTW GraniteShares 2x Long INTC Daily ETF	552.98%	50.41%

Correlation

The correlation between EZJ and INTW 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 Feb 14, 2025	0.32

EZJ vs. INTW - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	EZJ	INTW
Industrials	26.0%	-
Technology	19.1%	66.7%
Financial Services	17.6%	-
Consumer Cyclical	12.2%	-
Communication Services	7.9%	-
Healthcare	6.2%	-
Consumer Defensive	3.6%	-
Basic Materials	3.0%	-
Real Estate	2.3%	-
Utilities	1.1%	-
Energy	1.1%	-

Return for Risk

EZJ vs. INTW — Risk / Return Rank

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

EZJ

EZJ Risk / Return Rank: 43
EZJ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 43
EZJ Sortino Ratio Rank: 42
EZJ Omega Ratio Rank: 43
EZJ Calmar Ratio Rank: 45
EZJ Martin Ratio Rank: 43

INTW

INTW Risk / Return Rank: 97
INTW Sharpe Ratio Rank: 99
INTW Sortino Ratio Rank: 95
INTW Omega Ratio Rank: 93
INTW Calmar Ratio Rank: 99
INTW Martin Ratio Rank: 98

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.

EZJ vs. INTW - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ProShares Ultra MSCI Japan (EZJ) 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.

	EZJ	INTW	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.49	11.27	-9.78
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.10	5.08	-2.97
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.27	1.64	-0.36
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.21	32.74	-30.53
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	6.79	76.36	-69.57
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

EZJ vs. INTW - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EZJ Sharpe Ratio is 1.49, which is lower than the INTW Sharpe Ratio of 11.27. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EZJ 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.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	EZJ	INTW	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.49	11.27	-9.78
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.21	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.31	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.24	3.33	-3.09

Drawdowns

EZJ vs. INTW - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EZJ drawdown since its inception was -58.63%, roughly equal to the maximum INTW drawdown of -60.58%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EZJ and INTW.

Drawdown Indicators

	EZJ	INTW	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-58.63%	-60.58%	+1.95%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-26.78%	-49.34%	+22.56%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-31.48%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-58.63%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-58.63%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-3.87%	-27.77%	+23.90%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-21.28%	-30.06%	+8.78%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	8.72%	21.12%	-12.40%

Volatility

EZJ vs. INTW - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for ProShares Ultra MSCI Japan (EZJ) is 8.46%, while GraniteShares 2x Long INTC Daily ETF (INTW) has a volatility of 42.92%. This indicates that EZJ 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

	EZJ	INTW	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	8.46%	42.92%	-34.46%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	30.74%	110.50%	-79.76%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	39.67%	143.34%	-103.67%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	36.58%	145.01%	-108.43%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	34.53%	145.01%	-110.48%

EZJ vs. INTW - Expense Ratio Comparison

EZJ has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is lower than INTW's 1.50% expense ratio.

Dividends

EZJ vs. INTW - Dividend Comparison

EZJ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.60%, while INTW has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018
EZJ ProShares Ultra MSCI Japan	1.60%	1.13%	2.09%	1.11%	0.56%	0.00%	0.00%	0.24%	4.49%
INTW GraniteShares 2x Long INTC Daily ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both EZJ and INTW in my portfolio?

EZJ and INTW 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.

Which is riskier, EZJ or INTW?

INTW has higher volatility (42.92%) compared to EZJ (8.46%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EZJ dropped -58.63% vs INTW's -60.58%.

Which ETF is better, EZJ or INTW?

On 1-year performance, INTW leads with 1596.33% vs 58.99% for EZJ. On fees, EZJ is cheaper at 0.95% per year. On volatility, EZJ has been the lower-risk option at 8.46%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, EZJ or INTW?

Over the 1-year period, INTW has performed better with a 1596.33% return vs 58.99%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, EZJ or INTW?

EZJ is cheaper with a 0.95% expense ratio, compared with 1.50% for INTW.

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

EZJ has the higher dividend yield at 1.60%, compared with 0.00% for INTW.

What is the main difference between EZJ and INTW?

They also come from different issuers: ProShares and GraniteShares. Their fees differ too: 0.95% for EZJ and 1.50% for INTW.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

INTW currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (11.27 vs 1.49), 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.