FBL vs. MULL
FBL (GraniteShares 2x Long META Daily ETF) and MULL (GraniteShares 2x Long MU Daily ETF) are both Leveraged Equities funds from GraniteShares. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, FBL returned -36.08% vs 6388.53% for MULL. At a 0.32 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. FBL charges 1.15%/yr vs 1.50%/yr for MULL.
Performance
FBL vs. MULL - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, FBL achieves a -25.99% return, which is significantly lower than MULL's 907.48% return.
FBL
- 1D
- -1.07%
- 1M
- -4.94%
- YTD
- -25.99%
- 6M
- -23.80%
- 1Y
- -36.08%
- 3Y*
- 29.68%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
MULL
- 1D
- 5.57%
- 1M
- 246.94%
- YTD
- 907.48%
- 6M
- 1,268.17%
- 1Y
- 6,388.53%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
FBL vs. MULL - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | |
|---|---|---|---|
FBL GraniteShares 2x Long META Daily ETF | -25.99% | 0.50% | -1.46% |
MULL GraniteShares 2x Long MU Daily ETF | 907.48% | 558.51% | -40.10% |
Correlation
The correlation between FBL and MULL is 0.23, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.23 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 13, 2024 | 0.32 |
FBL vs. MULL - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
FBL
MULL
Communication Services
-
Basic Materials
-
-
Consumer Cyclical
-
-
Consumer Defensive
-
-
Energy
-
-
Financial Services
-
-
Healthcare
-
-
Industrials
-
-
Real Estate
-
-
Technology
-
Utilities
-
-
Communication Services
FBL
MULL
-
Basic Materials
FBL
-
MULL
-
Consumer Cyclical
FBL
-
MULL
-
Consumer Defensive
FBL
-
MULL
-
Energy
FBL
-
MULL
-
Financial Services
FBL
-
MULL
-
Healthcare
FBL
-
MULL
-
Industrials
FBL
-
MULL
-
Real Estate
FBL
-
MULL
-
Technology
FBL
-
MULL
Utilities
FBL
-
MULL
-
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. MULL — Risk / Return Rank
FBL
MULL
FBL vs. MULL - 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 MU Daily ETF (MULL). 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.
| FBL | MULL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.52 | 49.08 | -49.60 |
Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.42 | 7.09 | -7.51 |
Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 0.95 | 1.90 | -0.95 |
Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.51 | 130.56 | -131.07 |
Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -0.96 | 439.01 | -439.97 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| FBL | MULL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | -0.52 | 49.08 | -49.60 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 1.06 | 7.34 | -6.28 |
Drawdowns
FBL vs. MULL - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum FBL drawdown since its inception was -61.15%, smaller than the maximum MULL drawdown of -72.29%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FBL and MULL.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| FBL | MULL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -61.15% | -72.29% | +11.14% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -61.03% | -53.09% | -7.94% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -61.15% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -52.04% | 0.00% | -52.04% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -16.38% | -20.67% | +4.29% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 32.62% | 15.79% | +16.83% |
Volatility
FBL vs. MULL - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for GraniteShares 2x Long META Daily ETF (FBL) is 15.51%, while GraniteShares 2x Long MU Daily ETF (MULL) has a volatility of 55.71%. This indicates that FBL experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than MULL based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| FBL | MULL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 15.51% | 55.71% | -40.20% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 52.53% | 105.59% | -53.06% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 70.31% | 132.53% | -62.22% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 70.96% | 136.39% | -65.43% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 70.96% | 136.39% | -65.43% |
FBL vs. MULL - Expense Ratio Comparison
FBL has a 1.15% expense ratio, which is lower than MULL's 1.50% expense ratio.
Dividends
FBL vs. MULL - Dividend Comparison
FBL's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.80%, more than MULL's 0.04% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
FBL GraniteShares 2x Long META Daily ETF | 2.80% | 2.07% | 0.00% | 51.58% |
MULL GraniteShares 2x Long MU Daily ETF | 0.04% | 0.39% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
FBL and MULL have a correlation of 0.23, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
MULL has higher volatility (55.71%) compared to FBL (15.51%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FBL dropped -61.15% vs MULL's -72.29%.
On 1-year performance, MULL leads with 6388.53% vs -36.08% for FBL. On fees, FBL is cheaper at 1.15% per year. On volatility, FBL has been the lower-risk option at 15.51%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, MULL has performed better with a 6388.53% return vs -36.08%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
FBL is cheaper with a 1.15% expense ratio, compared with 1.50% for MULL.
FBL has the higher dividend yield at 2.80%, compared with 0.04% for MULL.
Their fees differ too: 1.15% for FBL and 1.50% for MULL.
MULL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (49.08 vs -0.52), 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 MULL
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