FBL vs. BLOK

Last updated Jun 13, 2026

FBL (GraniteShares 2x Long META Daily ETF) and BLOK (Amplify Blockchain Technology ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - FBL is a Leveraged Equities fund actively managed by GraniteShares, while BLOK is a Blockchain fund actively managed by Amplify. Both are actively managed. Over the past 3 years, FBL returned 25.43%/yr vs 50.68%/yr for BLOK. At a 0.44 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. FBL charges 1.15%/yr vs 0.70%/yr for BLOK.

Performance

FBL vs. BLOK - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in GraniteShares 2x Long META Daily ETF (FBL) and Amplify Blockchain Technology ETF (BLOK). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FBL achieves a -34.05% return, which is significantly lower than BLOK's 12.57% return.

FBL

• 1D: -0.74%
• 1M: -17.09%
• YTD: -34.05%
• 6M: -31.11%
• 1Y: -46.30%
• 3Y*: 25.43%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

BLOK

• 1D: 1.33%
• 1M: -0.28%
• YTD: 12.57%
• 6M: 5.60%
• 1Y: 24.42%
• 3Y*: 50.68%
• 5Y*: 11.50%
• 10Y*: —

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

FBL vs. BLOK - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
FBL GraniteShares 2x Long META Daily ETF	-34.05%	0.50%	112.72%	341.59%	-1.38%
BLOK Amplify Blockchain Technology ETF	12.57%	32.64%	53.12%	99.62%	-7.24%

Correlation

The correlation between FBL and BLOK is 0.38, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.38
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.42
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 13, 2022	0.44

FBL vs. BLOK - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	FBL	BLOK
Communication Services	66.7%	5.2%
Basic Materials	-	-
Consumer Cyclical	-	6.7%
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Energy	-	-
Financial Services	-	55.3%
Healthcare	-	-
Industrials	-	1.0%
Real Estate	-	0.0%
Technology	-	31.8%
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

FBL vs. BLOK — Risk / Return Rank

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

FBL

FBL Risk / Return Rank: 4
FBL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4
FBL Sortino Ratio Rank: 5
FBL Omega Ratio Rank: 4
FBL Calmar Ratio Rank: 3
FBL Martin Ratio Rank: 2

BLOK

BLOK Risk / Return Rank: 20
BLOK Sharpe Ratio Rank: 21
BLOK Sortino Ratio Rank: 22
BLOK Omega Ratio Rank: 22
BLOK Calmar Ratio Rank: 19
BLOK Martin Ratio Rank: 17

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.

FBL vs. BLOK - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for GraniteShares 2x Long META Daily ETF (FBL) and Amplify Blockchain Technology ETF (BLOK). 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.

	FBL	BLOK	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.65	0.63	-1.28
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-0.73	1.08	-1.81
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.91	1.13	-0.23
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.76	0.69	-1.45
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-1.36	1.49	-2.86

FBL vs. BLOK - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FBL Sharpe Ratio is -0.65, which is lower than the BLOK Sharpe Ratio of 0.63. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FBL and BLOK, 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

FBL vs. BLOK - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FBL drawdown since its inception was -61.15%, smaller than the maximum BLOK drawdown of -73.33%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FBL and BLOK.

Drawdown Indicators

	FBL	BLOK	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-61.15%	-73.33%	+12.18%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-61.03%	-35.64%	-25.39%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-61.15%	-35.64%	-25.51%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-73.33%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-57.26%	-12.97%	-44.29%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-16.70%	-26.03%	+9.33%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	33.98%	16.41%	+17.57%

Volatility

FBL vs. BLOK - Volatility Comparison

GraniteShares 2x Long META Daily ETF (FBL) has a higher volatility of 20.60% compared to Amplify Blockchain Technology ETF (BLOK) at 13.34%. This indicates that FBL's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than BLOK based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FBL	BLOK	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	20.60%	13.34%	+7.26%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	53.92%	30.02%	+23.90%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	71.02%	39.18%	+31.84%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	71.08%	42.53%	+28.55%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	71.08%	39.05%	+32.03%

FBL vs. BLOK - Expense Ratio Comparison

FBL has a 1.15% expense ratio, which is higher than BLOK's 0.70% expense ratio.

Dividends

FBL vs. BLOK - Dividend Comparison

FBL's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.14%, more than BLOK's 0.64% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018
BLOK Amplify Blockchain Technology ETF	0.64%	0.72%	6.00%	1.15%	0.00%	14.31%	1.88%	2.05%	1.30%
FBL GraniteShares 2x Long META Daily ETF	3.14%	2.07%	0.00%	51.58%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FBL and BLOK in my portfolio?

FBL and BLOK have a correlation of 0.38, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, FBL or BLOK?

FBL has higher volatility (20.60%) compared to BLOK (13.34%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FBL dropped -61.15% vs BLOK's -73.33%.

Which ETF is better, FBL or BLOK?

On 3-year performance, BLOK leads with 50.68% vs 25.43% for FBL. On fees, BLOK is cheaper at 0.70% per year. On volatility, BLOK has been the lower-risk option at 13.34%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FBL or BLOK?

Over the 3-year period, BLOK has performed better with a 50.68% return vs 25.43%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FBL or BLOK?

BLOK is cheaper with a 0.70% expense ratio, compared with 1.15% for FBL.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, FBL or BLOK?

FBL has the higher dividend yield at 3.14%, compared with 0.64% for BLOK.

What is the main difference between FBL and BLOK?

FBL is categorized as Leveraged Equities, while BLOK is Blockchain. They also come from different issuers: GraniteShares and Amplify. Their fees differ too: 1.15% for FBL and 0.70% for BLOK.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

BLOK currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.63 vs -0.65), 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.