INTW vs. HOOG

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

INTW (GraniteShares 2x Long INTC Daily ETF) and HOOG (Leverage Shares 2X Long HOOD Daily ETF) are both Leveraged Equities funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, INTW returned 1617.48% vs -29.31% for HOOG. At a 0.24 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. INTW charges 1.50%/yr vs 0.75%/yr for HOOG.

Performance

INTW vs. HOOG - 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 HOOD Daily ETF (HOOG). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, INTW achieves a 562.71% return, which is significantly higher than HOOG's -60.40% return.

INTW

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

HOOG

• 1D: -12.13%
• 1M: 10.59%
• YTD: -60.40%
• 6M: -72.73%
• 1Y: -29.31%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

INTW vs. HOOG - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
INTW GraniteShares 2x Long INTC Daily ETF	562.71%	63.01%
HOOG Leverage Shares 2X Long HOOD Daily ETF	-60.40%	291.44%

Correlation

The correlation between INTW and HOOG is 0.18, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.18
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 24, 2025	0.24

Return for Risk

INTW vs. HOOG — 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

HOOG

HOOG Risk / Return Rank: 9
HOOG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6
HOOG Sortino Ratio Rank: 14
HOOG Omega Ratio Rank: 13
HOOG Calmar Ratio Rank: 6
HOOG Martin Ratio Rank: 6

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. HOOG - 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 HOOD Daily ETF (HOOG). 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	HOOG	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	11.42	-0.22	+11.64
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	5.09	0.64	+4.46
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.64	1.07	+0.56
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	33.18	-0.34	+33.52
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	77.63	-0.55	+78.19
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. HOOG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current INTW Sharpe Ratio is 11.42, which is higher than the HOOG Sharpe Ratio of -0.22. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of INTW and HOOG, 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	HOOG	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	11.42	-0.22	+11.64
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	3.39	0.31	+3.08

Drawdowns

INTW vs. HOOG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum INTW drawdown since its inception was -60.58%, smaller than the maximum HOOG drawdown of -86.94%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for INTW and HOOG.

Drawdown Indicators

	INTW	HOOG	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-60.58%	-86.94%	+26.36%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-49.34%	-86.94%	+37.60%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-26.69%	-81.53%	+54.84%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-30.07%	-37.56%	+7.49%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	21.05%	53.22%	-32.17%

Volatility

INTW vs. HOOG - Volatility Comparison

GraniteShares 2x Long INTC Daily ETF (INTW) has a higher volatility of 48.71% compared to Leverage Shares 2X Long HOOD Daily ETF (HOOG) at 41.51%. This indicates that INTW's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than HOOG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	INTW	HOOG	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	48.71%	41.51%	+7.20%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	111.40%	100.64%	+10.76%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	143.36%	137.15%	+6.21%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	145.22%	144.88%	+0.34%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	145.22%	144.88%	+0.34%

INTW vs. HOOG - Expense Ratio Comparison

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

Dividends

INTW vs. HOOG - Dividend Comparison

INTW has not paid dividends to shareholders, while HOOG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 31.07%.

Position	TTM	2025
HOOG Leverage Shares 2X Long HOOD Daily ETF	31.07%	12.30%
INTW GraniteShares 2x Long INTC Daily ETF	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both INTW and HOOG in my portfolio?

INTW and HOOG have a correlation of 0.18, 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 HOOG?

INTW has higher volatility (48.71%) compared to HOOG (41.51%). In terms of maximum drawdown, INTW dropped -60.58% vs HOOG's -86.94%.

Which ETF is better, INTW or HOOG?

On 1-year performance, INTW leads with 1617.48% vs -29.31% for HOOG. On fees, HOOG is cheaper at 0.75% per year. On volatility, HOOG has been the lower-risk option at 41.51%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, INTW or HOOG?

Over the 1-year period, INTW has performed better with a 1617.48% return vs -29.31%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, INTW or HOOG?

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

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

HOOG has the higher dividend yield at 31.07%, compared with 0.00% for INTW.

What is the main difference between INTW and HOOG?

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

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

INTW currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (11.42 vs -0.22), 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.