INTW vs. MUU

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

INTW (GraniteShares 2x Long INTC Daily ETF) and MUU (Direxion Daily MU Bull 2X Shares) are both Leveraged Equities funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, INTW returned 1617.48% vs 6522.95% for MUU. At a 0.44 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. INTW charges 1.50%/yr vs 1.06%/yr for MUU.

Performance

INTW vs. MUU - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in GraniteShares 2x Long INTC Daily ETF (INTW) and Direxion Daily MU Bull 2X Shares (MUU). 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 lower than MUU's 961.23% return.

INTW

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

MUU

• 1D: 3.08%
• 1M: 218.90%
• YTD: 961.23%
• 6M: 1,422.01%
• 1Y: 6,522.95%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

INTW vs. MUU - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
INTW GraniteShares 2x Long INTC Daily ETF	562.71%	50.41%
MUU Direxion Daily MU Bull 2X Shares	961.23%	474.76%

Correlation

The correlation between INTW and MUU is 0.40, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.40
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 14, 2025	0.44

Return for Risk

INTW vs. MUU — 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

MUU

MUU Risk / Return Rank: 99
MUU Sharpe Ratio Rank: 100
MUU Sortino Ratio Rank: 98
MUU Omega Ratio Rank: 97
MUU Calmar Ratio Rank: 100
MUU Martin Ratio Rank: 100

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. MUU - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for GraniteShares 2x Long INTC Daily ETF (INTW) and Direxion Daily MU Bull 2X Shares (MUU). 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	MUU	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	11.42	50.40	-38.98
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	5.09	7.17	-2.08
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.64	1.91	-0.27
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	33.18	125.85	-92.67
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	77.63	426.84	-349.20
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. MUU - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current INTW Sharpe Ratio is 11.42, which is lower than the MUU Sharpe Ratio of 50.40. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of INTW and MUU, 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	MUU	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	11.42	50.40	-38.98
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	3.39	6.68	-3.29

Drawdowns

INTW vs. MUU - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum INTW drawdown since its inception was -60.58%, smaller than the maximum MUU drawdown of -75.07%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for INTW and MUU.

Drawdown Indicators

	INTW	MUU	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-60.58%	-75.07%	+14.49%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-49.34%	-52.72%	+3.38%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-26.69%	0.00%	-26.69%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-30.07%	-23.44%	-6.63%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	21.05%	15.51%	+5.54%

Volatility

INTW vs. MUU - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for GraniteShares 2x Long INTC Daily ETF (INTW) is 48.71%, while Direxion Daily MU Bull 2X Shares (MUU) has a volatility of 54.78%. This indicates that INTW experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than MUU based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	INTW	MUU	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	48.71%	54.78%	-6.07%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	111.40%	105.07%	+6.33%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	143.36%	131.77%	+11.59%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	145.22%	133.67%	+11.55%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	145.22%	133.67%	+11.55%

INTW vs. MUU - Expense Ratio Comparison

INTW has a 1.50% expense ratio, which is higher than MUU's 1.06% expense ratio.

Dividends

INTW vs. MUU - Dividend Comparison

INTW has not paid dividends to shareholders, while MUU's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.46%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024
INTW GraniteShares 2x Long INTC Daily ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
MUU Direxion Daily MU Bull 2X Shares	0.46%	4.27%	0.31%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both INTW and MUU in my portfolio?

INTW and MUU have a correlation of 0.40, 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 MUU?

MUU has higher volatility (54.78%) compared to INTW (48.71%). In terms of maximum drawdown, INTW dropped -60.58% vs MUU's -75.07%.

Which ETF is better, INTW or MUU?

On 1-year performance, MUU leads with 6522.95% vs 1617.48% for INTW. On fees, MUU is cheaper at 1.06% per year. On volatility, INTW has been the lower-risk option at 48.71%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, INTW or MUU?

Over the 1-year period, MUU has performed better with a 6522.95% return vs 1617.48%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, INTW or MUU?

MUU is cheaper with a 1.06% expense ratio, compared with 1.50% for INTW.

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

MUU has the higher dividend yield at 0.46%, compared with 0.00% for INTW.

What is the main difference between INTW and MUU?

They also come from different issuers: GraniteShares and Direxion. Their fees differ too: 1.50% for INTW and 1.06% for MUU.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

MUU currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (50.40 vs 11.42), 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.