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

Performance

INTW vs. NRGU - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in GraniteShares 2x Long INTC Daily ETF (INTW) and MicroSectors U.S. Big Oil Index 3X Leveraged ETN (NRGU). 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 NRGU's 129.31% return.


INTW

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

NRGU

1D
2.53%
1M
-6.67%
YTD
129.31%
6M
97.01%
1Y
156.99%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

INTW vs. NRGU - Yearly Performance Comparison


Correlation

The correlation between INTW and NRGU is 0.07, 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

0.07

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 21, 2025

0.17

INTW vs. NRGU - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
INTW
NRGU

Technology

66.7%

-

Basic Materials

-

-

Communication Services

-

-

Consumer Cyclical

-

-

Consumer Defensive

-

-

Energy

-

100.0%

Financial Services

-

-

Healthcare

-

-

Industrials

-

-

Real Estate

-

-

Utilities

-

-

Technology

INTW
66.7%
NRGU

-

Basic Materials

INTW

-

NRGU

-

Communication Services

INTW

-

NRGU

-

Consumer Cyclical

INTW

-

NRGU

-

Consumer Defensive

INTW

-

NRGU

-

Energy

INTW

-

NRGU
100.0%

Financial Services

INTW

-

NRGU

-

Healthcare

INTW

-

NRGU

-

Industrials

INTW

-

NRGU

-

Real Estate

INTW

-

NRGU

-

Utilities

INTW

-

NRGU

-

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. NRGU — 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

NRGU
NRGU Risk / Return Rank: 5858
Overall Rank
NRGU Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6262
Sharpe Ratio Rank
NRGU Sortino Ratio Rank: 4848
Sortino Ratio Rank
NRGU Omega Ratio Rank: 4848
Omega Ratio Rank
NRGU Calmar Ratio Rank: 7777
Calmar Ratio Rank
NRGU Martin Ratio Rank: 5656
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. NRGU - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for GraniteShares 2x Long INTC Daily ETF (INTW) and MicroSectors U.S. Big Oil Index 3X Leveraged ETN (NRGU). 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.


INTWNRGUDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+9.32

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+2.66

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.64

1.30

+0.33

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

33.18

3.95

+29.22

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

77.63

9.88

+67.75

INTW vs. NRGU - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current INTW Sharpe Ratio is 11.42, which is higher than the NRGU Sharpe Ratio of 2.11. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of INTW and NRGU, 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


INTWNRGUDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

11.42

2.11

+9.32

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

3.39

0.45

+2.94

Drawdowns

INTW vs. NRGU - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum INTW drawdown since its inception was -60.58%, which is greater than NRGU's maximum drawdown of -57.50%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for INTW and NRGU.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


INTWNRGUDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-60.58%

-57.50%

-3.08%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-49.34%

-39.95%

-9.39%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-26.69%

-20.91%

-5.78%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-30.07%

-25.42%

-4.65%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

21.05%

15.96%

+5.09%

Volatility

INTW vs. NRGU - Volatility Comparison

GraniteShares 2x Long INTC Daily ETF (INTW) has a higher volatility of 48.71% compared to MicroSectors U.S. Big Oil Index 3X Leveraged ETN (NRGU) at 31.63%. This indicates that INTW's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than NRGU based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


INTWNRGUDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

48.71%

31.63%

+17.08%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

111.40%

61.27%

+50.13%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

143.36%

75.15%

+68.21%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

145.22%

89.15%

+56.07%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

145.22%

89.15%

+56.07%

INTW vs. NRGU - Expense Ratio Comparison

INTW has a 1.50% expense ratio, which is higher than NRGU's 0.95% expense ratio.


Dividends

INTW vs. NRGU - Dividend Comparison

Neither INTW nor NRGU has paid dividends to shareholders.


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions


INTW and NRGU have a correlation of 0.07, 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 NRGU (31.63%). In terms of maximum drawdown, INTW dropped -60.58% vs NRGU's -57.50%.

On 1-year performance, INTW leads with 1617.48% vs 156.99% for NRGU. On fees, NRGU is cheaper at 0.95% per year. On volatility, NRGU has been the lower-risk option at 31.63%. 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 156.99%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

NRGU is cheaper with a 0.95% expense ratio, compared with 1.50% for INTW.

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

They also come from different issuers: GraniteShares and BMO. Their fees differ too: 1.50% for INTW and 0.95% for NRGU.

INTW currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (11.42 vs 2.11), 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 NRGU

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