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

Performance

INTW vs. XDSQ - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in GraniteShares 2x Long INTC Daily ETF (INTW) and Innovator US Equity Accelerated ETF (XDSQ). 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 265.05% return, which is significantly higher than XDSQ's 5.19% return.


INTW

1D
1.44%
1M
-46.93%
6M
132.81%
YTD
265.05%
1Y
1,006.96%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
ALL TIME*
234.15%

XDSQ

1D
1.09%
1M
2.27%
6M
2.99%
YTD
5.19%
1Y
15.96%
3Y*
14.89%
5Y*
9.63%
10Y*
ALL TIME*
10.64%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Liquidity Comparison


PositionAvg. Volume Value (2W)Avg. Volume Value (1M)Avg. Volume Value (3M)
$147.89M$130.41M$215.01M
$815.75K$1.12M$552.04K

INTW vs. XDSQ - Yearly Performance Comparison


Correlation

The correlation between INTW and XDSQ is 0.40, which is low. Their historical price movements had little consistent relationship.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.

0.40

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 13, 2025

0.41

INTW vs. XDSQ - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
INTW
XDSQ

Technology

66.6%
39.1%

Basic Materials

-

1.7%

Communication Services

-

10.7%

Consumer Cyclical

-

9.9%

Consumer Defensive

-

4.5%

Energy

-

3.1%

Financial Services

-

10.9%

Healthcare

-

8.3%

Industrials

-

7.8%

Real Estate

-

1.8%

Utilities

-

2.1%

Technology

INTW
66.6%
XDSQ
39.1%

Basic Materials

INTW

-

XDSQ
1.7%

Communication Services

INTW

-

XDSQ
10.7%

Consumer Cyclical

INTW

-

XDSQ
9.9%

Consumer Defensive

INTW

-

XDSQ
4.5%

Energy

INTW

-

XDSQ
3.1%

Financial Services

INTW

-

XDSQ
10.9%

Healthcare

INTW

-

XDSQ
8.3%

Industrials

INTW

-

XDSQ
7.8%

Real Estate

INTW

-

XDSQ
1.8%

Utilities

INTW

-

XDSQ
2.1%

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. XDSQ — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks 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: 9494
Omega Ratio Rank
INTW Calmar Ratio Rank: 9999
Calmar Ratio Rank
INTW Martin Ratio Rank: 9898
Martin Ratio Rank

XDSQ
XDSQ Risk / Return Rank: 5858
Overall Rank
XDSQ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5959
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XDSQ Sortino Ratio Rank: 5757
Sortino Ratio Rank
XDSQ Omega Ratio Rank: 6868
Omega Ratio Rank
XDSQ Calmar Ratio Rank: 4545
Calmar Ratio Rank
XDSQ Martin Ratio Rank: 6262
Martin Ratio Rank
The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

INTW vs. XDSQ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for GraniteShares 2x Long INTC Daily ETF (INTW) and Innovator US Equity Accelerated ETF (XDSQ). 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.


INTWXDSQDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+5.01

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+2.05

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.50

1.30

+0.20

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

14.71

1.67

+13.04

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

39.28

7.88

+31.40

INTW vs. XDSQ - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current INTW Sharpe Ratio is 6.48, which is higher than the XDSQ Sharpe Ratio of 1.47. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of INTW and XDSQ, 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...

Drawdowns

INTW vs. XDSQ - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum INTW drawdown since its inception was -69.16%, which is greater than XDSQ's maximum drawdown of -26.06%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for INTW and XDSQ.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


INTWXDSQDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-69.16%

-26.06%

-43.10%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-69.16%

-9.60%

-59.56%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-19.15%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-26.06%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-62.43%

0.00%

-62.43%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-30.68%

-4.82%

-25.86%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

25.85%

2.03%

+23.82%

Volatility

INTW vs. XDSQ - Volatility Comparison

GraniteShares 2x Long INTC Daily ETF (INTW) has a higher volatility of 47.63% compared to Innovator US Equity Accelerated ETF (XDSQ) at 3.68%. This indicates that INTW's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than XDSQ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


INTWXDSQDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

47.63%

3.68%

+43.95%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

116.67%

8.20%

+108.47%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

157.41%

10.94%

+146.47%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

150.45%

15.31%

+135.14%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

150.45%

14.95%

+135.50%

INTW vs. XDSQ - Expense Ratio Comparison

INTW has a 1.50% expense ratio, which is higher than XDSQ's 0.79% expense ratio.


Dividends

INTW vs. XDSQ - Dividend Comparison

Neither INTW nor XDSQ has paid dividends to shareholders.


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions


INTW and XDSQ 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.

INTW has higher volatility (47.63%) compared to XDSQ (3.68%). In terms of maximum drawdown, INTW dropped -69.16% vs XDSQ's -26.06%.

On 1-year performance, INTW leads with 1006.96% vs 15.96% for XDSQ. On fees, XDSQ is cheaper at 0.79% per year. On volatility, XDSQ has been the lower-risk option at 3.68%. 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 1006.96% return vs 15.96%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

XDSQ is cheaper with a 0.79% expense ratio, compared with 1.50% for INTW.

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

They also come from different issuers: GraniteShares and Innovator. Their fees differ too: 1.50% for INTW and 0.79% for XDSQ.

INTW currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (6.48 vs 1.47), 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 XDSQ

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