FBL vs. META

Last updated Aug 2, 2026

FBL (GraniteShares 2x Long META Daily ETF) is Leveraged Equities fund actively managed by GraniteShares, while META (Meta Platforms, Inc.) is a stock. Over the past 3 years, FBL returned 12.26%/yr vs 20.28%/yr for META. Their 0.99 correlation means they have historically moved very closely together.

Performance

FBL vs. META - Performance Comparison

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FBL achieves a -39.43% return, which is significantly lower than META's -15.51% return.

FBL

• 1D: 6.66%
• 1M: -11.35%
• 6M: -47.34%
• YTD: -39.43%
• 1Y: -56.50%
• 3Y*: 12.26%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 61.04%

META

• 1D: 3.28%
• 1M: -4.49%
• 6M: -22.16%
• YTD: -15.51%
• 1Y: -25.53%
• 3Y*: 20.28%
• 5Y*: 9.53%
• 10Y*: 16.39%
• ALL TIME*: 20.02%

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
FBL GraniteShares 2x Long META Daily ETF	$25.01M	$36.98M	$35.23M
META Meta Platforms, Inc.	$9.87B	$11.79B	$10.93B

FBL vs. META - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
FBL GraniteShares 2x Long META Daily ETF	-39.43%	0.50%	112.72%	341.59%	-1.38%
META Meta Platforms, Inc.	-15.51%	13.09%	66.05%	194.13%	4.91%

Correlation

The correlation between FBL and META is 1.00 - they have historically moved very closely together. At this level, their price movements offset little of one another.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	1.00
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history.	1.00
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 13, 2022	0.99

The correlation between FBL and META has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.99 to 1.00 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

FBL vs. META — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

FBL

FBL Risk / Return Rank: 2
FBL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3
FBL Sortino Ratio Rank: 3
FBL Omega Ratio Rank: 3
FBL Calmar Ratio Rank: 1
FBL Martin Ratio Rank: 0

META

META Risk / Return Rank: 11
META Sharpe Ratio Rank: 12
META Sortino Ratio Rank: 14
META Omega Ratio Rank: 14
META Calmar Ratio Rank: 11
META Martin Ratio Rank: 5

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

FBL vs. META - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for GraniteShares 2x Long META Daily ETF (FBL) and Meta Platforms, Inc. (META). 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	META	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.78	-0.73	-0.04
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-1.07	-0.91	-0.16
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.87	0.89	-0.02
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.94	-0.84	-0.10
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-1.52	-1.52	0.00

FBL vs. META - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FBL Sharpe Ratio is -0.78, which is comparable to the META Sharpe Ratio of -0.73. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FBL and META, 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. META - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FBL drawdown since its inception was -63.20%, smaller than the maximum META drawdown of -76.74%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FBL and META.

Drawdown Indicators

	FBL	META	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-63.20%	-76.74%	+13.54%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-63.09%	-33.30%	-29.79%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-63.20%	-34.15%	-29.05%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-76.74%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-76.74%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-60.75%	-29.30%	-31.45%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-18.01%	-15.90%	-2.11%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	38.96%	18.25%	+20.71%

Volatility

FBL vs. META - Volatility Comparison

GraniteShares 2x Long META Daily ETF (FBL) has a higher volatility of 31.44% compared to Meta Platforms, Inc. (META) at 15.37%. This indicates that FBL's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than META based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FBL	META	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	31.44%	15.37%	+16.07%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	61.35%	30.29%	+31.06%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	79.78%	39.78%	+40.00%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	72.81%	44.68%	+28.13%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	72.81%	39.10%	+33.71%

Dividends

FBL vs. META - Dividend Comparison

FBL's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.42%, more than META's 0.38% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023
FBL GraniteShares 2x Long META Daily ETF	3.42%	2.07%	0.00%	51.58%
META Meta Platforms, Inc.	0.38%	0.32%	0.34%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FBL and META in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 1.00, FBL and META move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

Which is riskier, FBL or META?

FBL has higher volatility (31.44%) compared to META (15.37%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FBL dropped -63.20% vs META's -76.74%.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

META currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (-0.73 vs -0.78), 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.