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

Performance

INTW vs. FBL - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in GraniteShares 2x Long INTC Daily ETF (INTW) 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, INTW achieves a 562.71% return, which is significantly higher than FBL's -19.72% return.


INTW

1D
8.89%
1M
29.41%
YTD
562.71%
6M
361.23%
1Y
1,617.48%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*

FBL

1D
8.48%
1M
2.55%
YTD
-19.72%
6M
-15.34%
1Y
-29.78%
3Y*
33.25%
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

INTW vs. FBL - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)2025
INTW
GraniteShares 2x Long INTC Daily ETF
562.71%50.41%
FBL
GraniteShares 2x Long META Daily ETF
-19.72%-33.70%

Correlation

The correlation between INTW and FBL is 0.25, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


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

0.25

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 14, 2025

0.28

INTW vs. FBL - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
INTW
FBL

Technology

66.7%

-

Basic Materials

-

-

Communication Services

-

66.7%

Consumer Cyclical

-

-

Consumer Defensive

-

-

Energy

-

-

Financial Services

-

-

Healthcare

-

-

Industrials

-

-

Real Estate

-

-

Utilities

-

-

Technology

INTW
66.7%
FBL

-

Basic Materials

INTW

-

FBL

-

Communication Services

INTW

-

FBL
66.7%

Consumer Cyclical

INTW

-

FBL

-

Consumer Defensive

INTW

-

FBL

-

Energy

INTW

-

FBL

-

Financial Services

INTW

-

FBL

-

Healthcare

INTW

-

FBL

-

Industrials

INTW

-

FBL

-

Real Estate

INTW

-

FBL

-

Utilities

INTW

-

FBL

-

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

INTW vs. FBL — Risk / Return Rank

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

INTW
INTW Risk / Return Rank: 9797
Overall Rank
INTW Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9999
Sharpe Ratio Rank
INTW Sortino Ratio Rank: 9595
Sortino Ratio Rank
INTW Omega Ratio Rank: 9393
Omega Ratio Rank
INTW Calmar Ratio Rank: 9999
Calmar Ratio Rank
INTW Martin Ratio Rank: 9898
Martin Ratio Rank

FBL
FBL Risk / Return Rank: 55
Overall Rank
FBL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 55
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FBL Sortino Ratio Rank: 66
Sortino Ratio Rank
FBL Omega Ratio Rank: 66
Omega Ratio Rank
FBL Calmar Ratio Rank: 44
Calmar Ratio Rank
FBL Martin Ratio Rank: 44
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.

INTW vs. FBL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for GraniteShares 2x Long INTC Daily ETF (INTW) 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.


INTWFBLDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+11.85

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+5.31

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.64

0.97

+0.67

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

33.18

-0.49

+33.67

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

77.63

-0.91

+78.54

INTW vs. FBL - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current INTW Sharpe Ratio is 11.42, which is higher than the FBL Sharpe Ratio of -0.42. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of INTW 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...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


INTWFBLDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

11.42

-0.42

+11.85

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

3.39

1.12

+2.27

Drawdowns

INTW vs. FBL - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum INTW drawdown since its inception was -60.58%, roughly equal to the maximum FBL drawdown of -61.15%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for INTW and FBL.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


INTWFBLDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-60.58%

-61.15%

+0.57%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-49.34%

-61.03%

+11.69%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-61.15%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-26.69%

-47.97%

+21.28%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-30.07%

-16.41%

-13.66%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

21.05%

32.76%

-11.71%

Volatility

INTW vs. FBL - Volatility Comparison

GraniteShares 2x Long INTC Daily ETF (INTW) has a higher volatility of 48.71% compared to GraniteShares 2x Long META Daily ETF (FBL) at 17.63%. This indicates that INTW'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


INTWFBLDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

48.71%

17.63%

+31.08%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

111.40%

53.15%

+58.25%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

143.36%

70.42%

+72.94%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

145.22%

71.06%

+74.16%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

145.22%

71.06%

+74.16%

INTW vs. FBL - Expense Ratio Comparison

INTW has a 1.50% expense ratio, which is higher than FBL's 1.15% expense ratio.


Dividends

INTW vs. FBL - Dividend Comparison

INTW has not paid dividends to shareholders, while FBL's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.58%.


PositionTTM202520242023
FBL
GraniteShares 2x Long META Daily ETF
2.58%2.07%0.00%51.58%
INTW
GraniteShares 2x Long INTC Daily ETF
0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


INTW and FBL have a correlation of 0.25, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

INTW has higher volatility (48.71%) compared to FBL (17.63%). In terms of maximum drawdown, INTW dropped -60.58% vs FBL's -61.15%.

On 1-year performance, INTW leads with 1617.48% vs -29.78% for FBL. On fees, FBL is cheaper at 1.15% per year. On volatility, FBL has been the lower-risk option at 17.63%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, INTW has performed better with a 1617.48% return vs -29.78%. 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 INTW.

FBL has the higher dividend yield at 2.58%, compared with 0.00% for INTW.

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

INTW currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (11.42 vs -0.42), 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 INTW 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