FBL vs. METW
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 -48.06% vs -26.35% for METW. With a 0.99 correlation, they move nearly in lockstep. FBL charges 1.15%/yr vs 0.59%/yr for METW.
Performance
FBL vs. METW - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, FBL achieves a -35.56% return, which is significantly lower than METW's -19.43% return.
FBL
- 1D
- -0.57%
- 1M
- -17.03%
- YTD
- -35.56%
- 6M
- -36.69%
- 1Y
- -48.06%
- 3Y*
- 20.64%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
METW
- 1D
- -0.28%
- 1M
- -9.52%
- YTD
- -19.43%
- 6M
- -20.16%
- 1Y
- -26.35%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
FBL vs. METW - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
FBL GraniteShares 2x Long META Daily ETF | -35.56% | -19.38% |
METW Roundhill Meta Weeklypay ETF | -19.43% | -9.14% |
Correlation
The correlation between FBL and METW is 0.99 - 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 | 0.99 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 18, 2025 | 0.99 |
The correlation between FBL and METW has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.99 to 0.99 - a consistent structural relationship.
FBL vs. METW - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
FBL
METW
Communication Services
Basic Materials
-
-
Consumer Cyclical
-
-
Consumer Defensive
-
-
Energy
-
-
Financial Services
-
-
Healthcare
-
-
Industrials
-
-
Real Estate
-
-
Technology
-
-
Utilities
-
-
Communication Services
FBL
METW
Basic Materials
FBL
-
METW
-
Consumer Cyclical
FBL
-
METW
-
Consumer Defensive
FBL
-
METW
-
Energy
FBL
-
METW
-
Financial Services
FBL
-
METW
-
Healthcare
FBL
-
METW
-
Industrials
FBL
-
METW
-
Real Estate
FBL
-
METW
-
Technology
FBL
-
METW
-
Utilities
FBL
-
METW
-
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
Return for Risk
FBL vs. METW — Risk / Return Rank
FBL
METW
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 ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.05 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.07 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 0.90 | 0.91 | -0.01 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.79 | -0.65 | -0.14 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -1.37 | -1.25 | -0.12 |
Loading charts...
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.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| FBL | METW | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest 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 DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -58.24% | -36.08% | -22.16% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -16.96% | -18.08% | +1.12% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 35.05% | 21.11% | +13.94% |
Volatility
FBL vs. METW - Volatility Comparison
GraniteShares 2x Long META Daily ETF (FBL) has a higher volatility of 26.20% compared to Roundhill Meta Weeklypay ETF (METW) at 15.67%. 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.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| FBL | METW | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 26.20% | 15.67% | +10.53% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 55.87% | 33.51% | +22.36% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 72.38% | 43.19% | +29.19% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 71.35% | 43.09% | +28.26% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 71.35% | 43.09% | +28.26% |
FBL vs. METW - Expense Ratio Comparison
FBL has a 1.15% 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 3.22%, less than METW's 66.02% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
FBL GraniteShares 2x Long META Daily ETF | 3.22% | 2.07% | 0.00% | 51.58% |
METW Roundhill Meta Weeklypay ETF | 66.02% | 30.89% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
With a correlation of 0.99, 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.
FBL has higher volatility (26.20%) compared to METW (15.67%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FBL dropped -61.15% vs METW's -40.52%.
On 1-year performance, METW leads with -26.35% vs -48.06% for FBL. On fees, METW is cheaper at 0.59% per year. On volatility, METW has been the lower-risk option at 15.67%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, METW has performed better with a -26.35% return vs -48.06%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
METW is cheaper with a 0.59% expense ratio, compared with 1.15% for FBL.
METW has the higher dividend yield at 66.02%, compared with 3.22% for FBL.
FBL is categorized as Leveraged Equities, while METW is Technology Equities. They also come from different issuers: GraniteShares and Roundhill. Their fees differ too: 1.15% for FBL and 0.59% for METW.
METW currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (-0.61 vs -0.67), 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.
Find the right allocation for FBL and METW
Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.
Open Portfolio Optimizer