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

Performance

HOOG vs. FBL - Performance Comparison

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

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, HOOG achieves a -60.99% return, which is significantly lower than FBL's -39.43% return.


HOOG

1D
-0.05%
1M
-43.77%
6M
-47.78%
YTD
-60.99%
1Y
-61.45%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
ALL TIME*
43.80%

FBL

1D
6.66%
1M
-11.35%
6M
-47.34%
YTD
-39.43%
1Y
-56.50%
3Y*
12.26%
5Y*
10Y*
ALL TIME*
61.04%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Liquidity Comparison


PositionAvg. Volume Value (2W)Avg. Volume Value (1M)Avg. Volume Value (3M)
$25.01M$36.98M$35.23M
$9.83M$14.42M$16.77M

HOOG vs. FBL - Yearly Performance Comparison


Correlation

The correlation between HOOG and FBL is 0.39, which is low. Their historical price movements had little consistent relationship.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.

0.39

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 21, 2025

0.41

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

HOOG vs. FBL — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

HOOG
HOOG Risk / Return Rank: 66
Overall Rank
HOOG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 55
Sharpe Ratio Rank
HOOG Sortino Ratio Rank: 99
Sortino Ratio Rank
HOOG Omega Ratio Rank: 99
Omega Ratio Rank
HOOG Calmar Ratio Rank: 33
Calmar Ratio Rank
HOOG Martin Ratio Rank: 44
Martin Ratio Rank

FBL
FBL Risk / Return Rank: 22
Overall Rank
FBL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 33
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FBL Sortino Ratio Rank: 33
Sortino Ratio Rank
FBL Omega Ratio Rank: 33
Omega Ratio Rank
FBL Calmar Ratio Rank: 11
Calmar Ratio Rank
FBL Martin Ratio Rank: 00
Martin Ratio Rank
The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

HOOG vs. FBL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Leverage Shares 2X Long HOOD Daily ETF (HOOG) and GraniteShares 2x Long META Daily ETF (FBL). 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.


HOOGFBLDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.32

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+1.03

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.00

0.87

+0.13

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

-0.74

-0.94

+0.21

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

-1.05

-1.52

+0.47

HOOG vs. FBL - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current HOOG Sharpe Ratio is -0.46, which is higher than the FBL Sharpe Ratio of -0.78. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of HOOG and FBL, 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

HOOG vs. FBL - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum HOOG drawdown since its inception was -86.94%, which is greater than FBL's maximum drawdown of -63.20%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for HOOG and FBL.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


HOOGFBLDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-86.94%

-63.20%

-23.74%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-86.94%

-63.09%

-23.85%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-63.20%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-81.80%

-60.75%

-21.05%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-41.73%

-18.01%

-23.72%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

60.82%

38.96%

+21.86%

Volatility

HOOG vs. FBL - Volatility Comparison

Leverage Shares 2X Long HOOD Daily ETF (HOOG) has a higher volatility of 35.80% compared to GraniteShares 2x Long META Daily ETF (FBL) at 31.44%. This indicates that HOOG's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FBL based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


HOOGFBLDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

35.80%

31.44%

+4.36%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

107.69%

61.35%

+46.34%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

140.37%

79.78%

+60.59%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

144.04%

72.81%

+71.23%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

144.04%

72.81%

+71.23%

HOOG vs. FBL - Expense Ratio Comparison

HOOG has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is lower than FBL's 1.09% expense ratio.


Dividends

HOOG vs. FBL - Dividend Comparison

HOOG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 31.54%, more than FBL's 3.42% yield.


PositionTTM202520242023
FBL
GraniteShares 2x Long META Daily ETF
3.42%2.07%0.00%51.58%
HOOG
Leverage Shares 2X Long HOOD Daily ETF
31.54%12.30%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


HOOG and FBL have a correlation of 0.39, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

HOOG has higher volatility (35.80%) compared to FBL (31.44%). In terms of maximum drawdown, HOOG dropped -86.94% vs FBL's -63.20%.

On 1-year performance, FBL leads with -56.50% vs -61.45% for HOOG. On fees, HOOG is cheaper at 0.75% per year. On volatility, FBL has been the lower-risk option at 31.44%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, FBL has performed better with a -56.50% return vs -61.45%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

HOOG is cheaper with a 0.75% expense ratio, compared with 1.09% for FBL.

HOOG has the higher dividend yield at 31.54%, compared with 3.42% for FBL.

They also come from different issuers: Leverage Shares and GraniteShares. Their fees differ too: 0.75% for HOOG and 1.09% for FBL.

HOOG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (-0.46 vs -0.78), 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 HOOG and FBL

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