INTW vs. CRMG

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

INTW (GraniteShares 2x Long INTC Daily ETF) and CRMG (Leverage Shares 2X Long CRM Daily ETF) are both Leveraged Equities funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, INTW returned 1596.33% vs -60.55% for CRMG. At a 0.06 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. INTW charges 1.50%/yr vs 0.75%/yr for CRMG.

Performance

INTW vs. CRMG - Performance Comparison

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, INTW achieves a 552.98% return, which is significantly higher than CRMG's -56.09% return.

INTW

• 1D: -1.47%
• 1M: 1.09%
• YTD: 552.98%
• 6M: 433.74%
• 1Y: 1,596.33%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

CRMG

• 1D: -1.95%
• 1M: -1.95%
• YTD: -56.09%
• 6M: -50.25%
• 1Y: -60.55%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

INTW vs. CRMG - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
INTW GraniteShares 2x Long INTC Daily ETF	552.98%	148.85%
CRMG Leverage Shares 2X Long CRM Daily ETF	-56.09%	3.69%

Correlation

The correlation between INTW and CRMG is -0.01, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.01
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 7, 2025	0.06

Return for Risk

INTW vs. CRMG — Risk / Return Rank

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

INTW

INTW Risk / Return Rank: 97
INTW Sharpe Ratio Rank: 99
INTW Sortino Ratio Rank: 95
INTW Omega Ratio Rank: 93
INTW Calmar Ratio Rank: 99
INTW Martin Ratio Rank: 98

CRMG

CRMG Risk / Return Rank: 2
CRMG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3
CRMG Sortino Ratio Rank: 3
CRMG Omega Ratio Rank: 3
CRMG Calmar Ratio Rank: 2
CRMG 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.

INTW vs. CRMG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for GraniteShares 2x Long INTC Daily ETF (INTW) and Leverage Shares 2X Long CRM Daily ETF (CRMG). 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.

	INTW	CRMG	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	11.27	-0.81	+12.08
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	5.08	-1.14	+6.22
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.64	0.86	+0.77
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	32.74	-0.86	+33.60
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	76.36	-1.47	+77.83
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

INTW vs. CRMG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current INTW Sharpe Ratio is 11.27, which is higher than the CRMG Sharpe Ratio of -0.81. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of INTW and CRMG, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	INTW	CRMG	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	11.27	-0.81	+12.08
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	3.33	-0.65	+3.98

Drawdowns

INTW vs. CRMG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum INTW drawdown since its inception was -60.58%, smaller than the maximum CRMG drawdown of -74.38%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for INTW and CRMG.

Drawdown Indicators

	INTW	CRMG	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-60.58%	-74.38%	+13.80%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-49.34%	-70.91%	+21.57%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-27.77%	-67.87%	+40.10%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-30.06%	-37.81%	+7.75%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	21.12%	41.08%	-19.96%

Volatility

INTW vs. CRMG - Volatility Comparison

GraniteShares 2x Long INTC Daily ETF (INTW) has a higher volatility of 42.92% compared to Leverage Shares 2X Long CRM Daily ETF (CRMG) at 34.03%. This indicates that INTW's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CRMG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	INTW	CRMG	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	42.92%	34.03%	+8.89%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	110.50%	63.87%	+46.63%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	143.34%	75.31%	+68.03%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	145.01%	75.62%	+69.39%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	145.01%	75.62%	+69.39%

INTW vs. CRMG - Expense Ratio Comparison

INTW has a 1.50% expense ratio, which is higher than CRMG's 0.75% expense ratio.

Dividends

INTW vs. CRMG - Dividend Comparison

Neither INTW nor CRMG has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both INTW and CRMG in my portfolio?

INTW and CRMG have a correlation of -0.01, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, INTW or CRMG?

INTW has higher volatility (42.92%) compared to CRMG (34.03%). In terms of maximum drawdown, INTW dropped -60.58% vs CRMG's -74.38%.

Which ETF is better, INTW or CRMG?

On 1-year performance, INTW leads with 1596.33% vs -60.55% for CRMG. On fees, CRMG is cheaper at 0.75% per year. On volatility, CRMG has been the lower-risk option at 34.03%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, INTW or CRMG?

Over the 1-year period, INTW has performed better with a 1596.33% return vs -60.55%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, INTW or CRMG?

CRMG is cheaper with a 0.75% expense ratio, compared with 1.50% for INTW.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, INTW or CRMG?

INTW and CRMG have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

What is the main difference between INTW and CRMG?

They also come from different issuers: GraniteShares and Leverage Shares. Their fees differ too: 1.50% for INTW and 0.75% for CRMG.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

INTW currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (11.27 vs -0.81), 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.