FBL vs. METW

Last updated Jul 14, 2026

FBL (GraniteShares 2x Long META Daily ETF) and METW (Roundhill Meta Weeklypay ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - FBL is a Leveraged Equities fund actively managed by GraniteShares, while METW is a Technology Equities fund tracking the Ball Metaverse Index. FBL is actively managed, while METW is passively managed. Over the past year, FBL returned -33.72% vs -14.44% for METW. With a 1.00 correlation, they move nearly in lockstep. FBL charges 1.09%/yr vs 0.59%/yr for METW.

Performance

FBL vs. METW - Performance Comparison

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FBL achieves a -14.12% return, which is significantly lower than METW's -3.53% return.

FBL

• 1D: -3.69%
• 1M: 30.22%
• 6M: -8.94%
• YTD: -14.12%
• 1Y: -33.72%
• 3Y*: 28.66%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

METW

• 1D: -2.43%
• 1M: 18.67%
• 6M: 0.06%
• YTD: -3.53%
• 1Y: -14.44%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

FBL vs. METW - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
FBL GraniteShares 2x Long META Daily ETF	-14.12%	-19.38%
METW Roundhill Meta Weeklypay ETF	-3.53%	-9.14%

Correlation

The correlation between FBL and METW is 1.00 - these two move nearly in lockstep. At this level, holding both provides almost no diversification benefit. If you already own one, adding the other does little to reduce portfolio risk.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.00
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 18, 2025	1.00

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

FBL vs. METW - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	FBL	METW
Communication Services	66.7%	23.8%
Basic Materials	-	-
Consumer Cyclical	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Energy	-	-
Financial Services	-	-
Healthcare	-	-
Industrials	-	-
Real Estate	-	-
Technology	-	-
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

FBL vs. METW — Risk / Return Rank

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

FBL

FBL Risk / Return Rank: 6
FBL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5
FBL Sortino Ratio Rank: 6
FBL Omega Ratio Rank: 6
FBL Calmar Ratio Rank: 5
FBL Martin Ratio Rank: 5

METW

METW Risk / Return Rank: 6
METW Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6
METW Sortino Ratio Rank: 7
METW Omega Ratio Rank: 7
METW Calmar Ratio Rank: 6
METW Martin Ratio Rank: 6

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. METW - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for GraniteShares 2x Long META Daily ETF (FBL) and Roundhill Meta Weeklypay ETF (METW). 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	METW	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.44	-0.32	-0.12
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-0.22	-0.16	-0.06
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.97	0.98	-0.01
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.55	-0.36	-0.20
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-0.91	-0.65	-0.26

FBL vs. METW - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FBL Sharpe Ratio is -0.44, which is lower than the METW Sharpe Ratio of -0.32. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FBL and METW, 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. METW - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FBL drawdown since its inception was -61.15%, which is greater than METW's maximum drawdown of -40.52%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FBL and METW.

Drawdown Indicators

	FBL	METW	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-61.15%	-40.52%	-20.63%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-61.03%	-40.52%	-20.51%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-61.15%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-44.34%	-23.46%	-20.88%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-17.49%	-18.74%	+1.25%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	37.05%	22.30%	+14.75%

Volatility

FBL vs. METW - Volatility Comparison

GraniteShares 2x Long META Daily ETF (FBL) has a higher volatility of 31.85% compared to Roundhill Meta Weeklypay ETF (METW) at 18.86%. This indicates that FBL's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than METW based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FBL	METW	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	31.85%	18.86%	+12.99%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	61.90%	37.05%	+24.85%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	77.12%	45.91%	+31.21%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	72.36%	45.04%	+27.32%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	72.36%	45.04%	+27.32%

FBL vs. METW - Expense Ratio Comparison

FBL has a 1.09% expense ratio, which is higher than METW's 0.59% expense ratio.

Dividends

FBL vs. METW - Dividend Comparison

FBL's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.41%, less than METW's 55.71% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023
FBL GraniteShares 2x Long META Daily ETF	2.41%	2.07%	0.00%	51.58%
METW Roundhill Meta Weeklypay ETF	55.71%	30.89%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FBL and METW in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 1.00, FBL and METW 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 METW?

FBL has higher volatility (31.85%) compared to METW (18.86%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FBL dropped -61.15% vs METW's -40.52%.

Which ETF is better, FBL or METW?

On 1-year performance, METW leads with -14.44% vs -33.72% for FBL. On fees, METW is cheaper at 0.59% per year. On volatility, METW has been the lower-risk option at 18.86%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FBL or METW?

Over the 1-year period, METW has performed better with a -14.44% return vs -33.72%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FBL or METW?

METW is cheaper with a 0.59% expense ratio, compared with 1.09% for FBL.

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

METW has the higher dividend yield at 55.71%, compared with 2.41% for FBL.

What is the main difference between FBL and METW?

FBL is categorized as Leveraged Equities, while METW is Technology Equities. They also come from different issuers: GraniteShares and Roundhill. Their fees differ too: 1.09% for FBL and 0.59% for METW.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

METW currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (-0.32 vs -0.44), 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.