INTW vs. FBL

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

INTW (GraniteShares 2x Long INTC Daily ETF) and FBL (GraniteShares 2x Long META Daily ETF) are both Leveraged Equities funds from GraniteShares. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, INTW returned 1964.55% vs -48.06% for FBL. At a 0.26 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. INTW charges 1.50%/yr vs 1.15%/yr for FBL.

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.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, INTW achieves a 750.22% return, which is significantly higher than FBL's -35.56% return.

INTW

• 1D: -12.49%
• 1M: 12.21%
• YTD: 750.22%
• 6M: 775.58%
• 1Y: 1,964.55%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

FBL

• 1D: -0.57%
• 1M: -17.03%
• YTD: -35.56%
• 6M: -36.69%
• 1Y: -48.06%
• 3Y*: 20.64%
• 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	750.22%	60.89%
FBL GraniteShares 2x Long META Daily ETF	-35.56%	-33.19%

Correlation

The correlation between INTW and FBL is 0.22, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.22
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 13, 2025	0.26

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	-	-

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: 98
INTW Sharpe Ratio Rank: 100
INTW Sortino Ratio Rank: 96
INTW Omega Ratio Rank: 94
INTW Calmar Ratio Rank: 99
INTW Martin Ratio Rank: 99

FBL

FBL Risk / Return Rank: 3
FBL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4
FBL Sortino Ratio Rank: 4
FBL Omega Ratio Rank: 4
FBL Calmar Ratio Rank: 2
FBL Martin Ratio Rank: 2

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.

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.

	INTW	FBL	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	13.25	-0.67	+13.92
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	5.13	-0.77	+5.90
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.65	0.90	+0.75
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	40.32	-0.79	+41.11
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	91.49	-1.37	+92.87

INTW vs. FBL - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current INTW Sharpe Ratio is 13.25, which is higher than the FBL Sharpe Ratio of -0.67. 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.

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.

Drawdown Indicators

	INTW	FBL	Difference
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	-12.49%	-58.24%	+45.75%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-29.66%	-16.96%	-12.70%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	21.70%	35.05%	-13.35%

Volatility

INTW vs. FBL - Volatility Comparison

GraniteShares 2x Long INTC Daily ETF (INTW) has a higher volatility of 55.81% compared to GraniteShares 2x Long META Daily ETF (FBL) at 26.20%. 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.

Volatility by Period

	INTW	FBL	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	55.81%	26.20%	+29.61%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	119.10%	55.87%	+63.23%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	150.14%	72.38%	+77.76%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	148.88%	71.35%	+77.53%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	148.88%	71.35%	+77.53%

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 3.22%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023
FBL GraniteShares 2x Long META Daily ETF	3.22%	2.07%	0.00%	51.58%
INTW GraniteShares 2x Long INTC Daily ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both INTW and FBL in my portfolio?

INTW and FBL have a correlation of 0.22, 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 FBL?

INTW has higher volatility (55.81%) compared to FBL (26.20%). In terms of maximum drawdown, INTW dropped -60.58% vs FBL's -61.15%.

Which ETF is better, INTW or FBL?

On 1-year performance, INTW leads with 1964.55% 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.

Which ETF has performed better, INTW or FBL?

Over the 1-year period, INTW has performed better with a 1964.55% return vs -48.06%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, INTW or FBL?

FBL is cheaper with a 1.15% expense ratio, compared with 1.50% for INTW.

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

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

What is the main difference between INTW and FBL?

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

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

INTW currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (13.25 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.