FBL vs. MSFL

Last updated Jun 23, 2026

FBL (GraniteShares 2x Long META Daily ETF) and MSFL (GraniteShares 2x Long MSFT Daily ETF) are both Leveraged Equities funds from GraniteShares. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, FBL returned -45.27% vs -48.29% for MSFL. A 0.53 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. Both charge a 1.15% expense ratio.

Performance

FBL vs. MSFL - Performance Comparison

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FBL achieves a -35.19% return, which is significantly higher than MSFL's -47.07% return.

FBL

• 1D: -4.79%
• 1M: -16.55%
• YTD: -35.19%
• 6M: -35.68%
• 1Y: -45.27%
• 3Y*: 20.87%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

MSFL

• 1D: -6.13%
• 1M: -24.42%
• YTD: -47.07%
• 6M: -47.46%
• 1Y: -48.29%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

FBL vs. MSFL - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
FBL GraniteShares 2x Long META Daily ETF	-35.19%	0.50%	26.09%
MSFL GraniteShares 2x Long MSFT Daily ETF	-47.07%	16.99%	-8.21%

Correlation

The correlation between FBL and MSFL is 0.46, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.46
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 18, 2024	0.53

The correlation between FBL and MSFL has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.46 to 0.53 - a consistent structural relationship.

FBL vs. MSFL - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	FBL	MSFL
Communication Services	66.7%	-
Basic Materials	-	-
Consumer Cyclical	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Energy	-	-
Financial Services	-	-
Healthcare	-	-
Industrials	-	-
Real Estate	-	-
Technology	-	66.6%
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

FBL vs. MSFL — Risk / Return Rank

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

FBL

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

MSFL

MSFL Risk / Return Rank: 2
MSFL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2
MSFL Sortino Ratio Rank: 2
MSFL Omega Ratio Rank: 2
MSFL Calmar Ratio Rank: 2
MSFL Martin Ratio Rank: 1

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. MSFL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for GraniteShares 2x Long META Daily ETF (FBL) and GraniteShares 2x Long MSFT Daily ETF (MSFL). 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	MSFL	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.63	-0.93	+0.31
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-0.66	-1.29	+0.63
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.92	0.83	+0.08
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.74	-0.82	+0.07
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-1.30	-1.48	+0.18

FBL vs. MSFL - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FBL Sharpe Ratio is -0.63, which is higher than the MSFL Sharpe Ratio of -0.93. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FBL and MSFL, 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. MSFL - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FBL drawdown since its inception was -61.15%, roughly equal to the maximum MSFL drawdown of -59.39%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FBL and MSFL.

Drawdown Indicators

	FBL	MSFL	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-61.15%	-59.39%	-1.76%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-61.03%	-59.39%	-1.64%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-61.15%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-58.00%	-58.76%	+0.76%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-16.92%	-22.18%	+5.26%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	34.85%	32.63%	+2.22%

Volatility

FBL vs. MSFL - Volatility Comparison

GraniteShares 2x Long META Daily ETF (FBL) has a higher volatility of 26.24% compared to GraniteShares 2x Long MSFT Daily ETF (MSFL) at 22.11%. This indicates that FBL's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than MSFL based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FBL	MSFL	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	26.24%	22.11%	+4.13%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	56.07%	46.47%	+9.60%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	72.52%	51.97%	+20.55%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	71.39%	49.94%	+21.45%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	71.39%	49.94%	+21.45%

FBL vs. MSFL - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both FBL and MSFL have an expense ratio of 1.15%.

Dividends

FBL vs. MSFL - Dividend Comparison

FBL's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.20%, while MSFL has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023
FBL GraniteShares 2x Long META Daily ETF	3.20%	2.07%	0.00%	51.58%
MSFL GraniteShares 2x Long MSFT Daily ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FBL and MSFL in my portfolio?

FBL and MSFL have a correlation of 0.46, 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 MSFL?

FBL has higher volatility (26.24%) compared to MSFL (22.11%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FBL dropped -61.15% vs MSFL's -59.39%.

Which ETF is better, FBL or MSFL?

On 1-year performance, FBL leads with -45.27% vs -48.29% for MSFL. Both ETFs have the same 1.15% expense ratio. On volatility, MSFL has been the lower-risk option at 22.11%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FBL or MSFL?

Over the 1-year period, FBL has performed better with a -45.27% return vs -48.29%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FBL or MSFL?

FBL and MSFL have the same expense ratio: 1.15% per year.

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

FBL has the higher dividend yield at 3.20%, compared with 0.00% for MSFL.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FBL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (-0.63 vs -0.93), 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.