PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
FBL vs. TSMU
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

FBL vs. TSMU - 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 TSM Daily ETF (TSMU). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FBL achieves a -35.56% return, which is significantly lower than TSMU's 76.82% return.


FBL

1D
-0.57%
1M
-17.03%
YTD
-35.56%
6M
-36.69%
1Y
-48.06%
3Y*
20.64%
5Y*
10Y*

TSMU

1D
-13.58%
1M
12.60%
YTD
76.82%
6M
84.23%
1Y
224.68%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

FBL vs. TSMU - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024
FBL
GraniteShares 2x Long META Daily ETF
-35.56%0.50%-1.08%
TSMU
GraniteShares 2x Long TSM Daily ETF
76.82%74.83%3.55%

Correlation

The correlation between FBL and TSMU is 0.30, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.30

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 12, 2024

0.42

The correlation between FBL and TSMU shifts across timeframes, from 0.30 (1 year) to 0.42 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

FBL vs. TSMU - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
FBL
TSMU

Communication Services

66.7%

-

Basic Materials

-

-

Consumer Cyclical

-

-

Consumer Defensive

-

-

Energy

-

-

Financial Services

-

-

Healthcare

-

-

Industrials

-

-

Real Estate

-

-

Technology

-

66.6%

Utilities

-

-

Communication Services

FBL
66.7%
TSMU

-

Basic Materials

FBL

-

TSMU

-

Consumer Cyclical

FBL

-

TSMU

-

Consumer Defensive

FBL

-

TSMU

-

Energy

FBL

-

TSMU

-

Financial Services

FBL

-

TSMU

-

Healthcare

FBL

-

TSMU

-

Industrials

FBL

-

TSMU

-

Real Estate

FBL

-

TSMU

-

Technology

FBL

-

TSMU
66.6%

Utilities

FBL

-

TSMU

-

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. TSMU — Risk / Return Rank

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

FBL
FBL Risk / Return Rank: 33
Overall Rank
FBL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 44
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FBL Sortino Ratio Rank: 44
Sortino Ratio Rank
FBL Omega Ratio Rank: 44
Omega Ratio Rank
FBL Calmar Ratio Rank: 22
Calmar Ratio Rank
FBL Martin Ratio Rank: 22
Martin Ratio Rank

TSMU
TSMU Risk / Return Rank: 8484
Overall Rank
TSMU Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9292
Sharpe Ratio Rank
TSMU Sortino Ratio Rank: 7474
Sortino Ratio Rank
TSMU Omega Ratio Rank: 6868
Omega Ratio Rank
TSMU Calmar Ratio Rank: 9494
Calmar Ratio Rank
TSMU Martin Ratio Rank: 9191
Martin Ratio Rank
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. TSMU - 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 TSM Daily ETF (TSMU). 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.


FBLTSMUDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-3.63

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-3.82

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

0.90

1.37

-0.47

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

-0.79

6.43

-7.22

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

-1.37

20.44

-21.81

FBL vs. TSMU - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FBL Sharpe Ratio is -0.67, which is lower than the TSMU Sharpe Ratio of 2.97. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FBL and TSMU, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Drawdowns

FBL vs. TSMU - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FBL drawdown since its inception was -61.15%, roughly equal to the maximum TSMU drawdown of -63.73%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FBL and TSMU.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


FBLTSMUDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-61.15%

-63.73%

+2.58%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-61.03%

-35.18%

-25.85%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-61.15%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-58.24%

-13.58%

-44.66%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-16.96%

-15.71%

-1.25%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

35.05%

11.05%

+24.00%

Volatility

FBL vs. TSMU - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for GraniteShares 2x Long META Daily ETF (FBL) is 26.20%, while GraniteShares 2x Long TSM Daily ETF (TSMU) has a volatility of 32.59%. This indicates that FBL experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than TSMU based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


FBLTSMUDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

26.20%

32.59%

-6.39%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

55.87%

59.71%

-3.84%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

72.38%

76.25%

-3.87%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

71.35%

82.32%

-10.97%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

71.35%

82.32%

-10.97%

FBL vs. TSMU - Expense Ratio Comparison

FBL has a 1.15% expense ratio, which is lower than TSMU's 1.50% expense ratio.


Dividends

FBL vs. TSMU - Dividend Comparison

FBL's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.22%, while TSMU has not paid dividends to shareholders.


PositionTTM202520242023
FBL
GraniteShares 2x Long META Daily ETF
3.22%2.07%0.00%51.58%
TSMU
GraniteShares 2x Long TSM Daily ETF
0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


FBL and TSMU have a correlation of 0.30, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

TSMU has higher volatility (32.59%) compared to FBL (26.20%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FBL dropped -61.15% vs TSMU's -63.73%.

On 1-year performance, TSMU leads with 224.68% vs -48.06% for FBL. On fees, FBL is cheaper at 1.15% per year. On volatility, FBL has been the lower-risk option at 26.20%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, TSMU has performed better with a 224.68% return vs -48.06%. 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 TSMU.

FBL has the higher dividend yield at 3.22%, compared with 0.00% for TSMU.

Their fees differ too: 1.15% for FBL and 1.50% for TSMU.

TSMU currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.97 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for FBL and TSMU

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