LCDL vs. BWET

Last updated Jun 6, 2026

LCDL (GraniteShares 2x Long LCID Daily ETF) and BWET (Breakwave Tanker Shipping ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - LCDL is a Leveraged Equities fund actively managed by GraniteShares, while BWET is a Commodities fund tracking the Breakwave Wet Freight Futures Index. LCDL is actively managed, while BWET is passively managed. Over the past year, LCDL returned -97.05% vs 1888.50% for BWET. At a correlation of -0.07, they often move in opposite directions. LCDL charges 1.15%/yr vs 3.50%/yr for BWET.

Performance

LCDL vs. BWET - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in GraniteShares 2x Long LCID Daily ETF (LCDL) and Breakwave Tanker Shipping ETF (BWET). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, LCDL achieves a -82.24% return, which is significantly lower than BWET's 942.01% return.

LCDL

• 1D: -18.78%
• 1M: -33.34%
• YTD: -82.24%
• 6M: -89.30%
• 1Y: -97.05%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

BWET

• 1D: -4.41%
• 1M: 8.17%
• YTD: 942.01%
• 6M: 777.15%
• 1Y: 1,888.50%
• 3Y*: 137.58%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

LCDL vs. BWET - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
LCDL GraniteShares 2x Long LCID Daily ETF	-82.24%	-87.02%
BWET Breakwave Tanker Shipping ETF	942.01%	73.24%

Correlation

The correlation between LCDL and BWET is -0.08, 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	-0.08
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 23, 2025	-0.07

LCDL vs. BWET - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	LCDL	BWET
Consumer Cyclical	66.7%	-
Basic Materials	-	-
Communication Services	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Energy	-	-
Financial Services	-	8.6%
Healthcare	-	-
Industrials	-	-
Real Estate	-	-
Technology	-	-
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

LCDL vs. BWET — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

LCDL

LCDL Risk / Return Rank: 2
LCDL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4
LCDL Sortino Ratio Rank: 0
LCDL Omega Ratio Rank: 0
LCDL Calmar Ratio Rank: 0
LCDL Martin Ratio Rank: 3

BWET

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

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.

LCDL vs. BWET - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for GraniteShares 2x Long LCID Daily ETF (LCDL) and Breakwave Tanker Shipping ETF (BWET). 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.

	LCDL	BWET	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.64	19.34	-19.98
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-2.44	6.63	-9.07
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.75	1.96	-1.22
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.99	62.41	-63.40
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-1.26	165.71	-166.97
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

LCDL vs. BWET - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current LCDL Sharpe Ratio is -0.64, which is lower than the BWET Sharpe Ratio of 19.34. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of LCDL and BWET, 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

	LCDL	BWET	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.64	19.34	-19.98
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	-0.65	1.95	-2.60

Drawdowns

LCDL vs. BWET - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum LCDL drawdown since its inception was -98.50%, which is greater than BWET's maximum drawdown of -56.90%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LCDL and BWET.

Drawdown Indicators

	LCDL	BWET	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-98.50%	-56.90%	-41.60%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-98.45%	-30.64%	-67.81%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-56.90%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-98.50%	-5.28%	-93.22%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-69.12%	-24.03%	-45.09%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	76.86%	11.52%	+65.34%

Volatility

LCDL vs. BWET - Volatility Comparison

GraniteShares 2x Long LCID Daily ETF (LCDL) has a higher volatility of 41.04% compared to Breakwave Tanker Shipping ETF (BWET) at 25.84%. This indicates that LCDL's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than BWET based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	LCDL	BWET	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	41.04%	25.84%	+15.20%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	98.89%	88.99%	+9.90%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	151.10%	98.89%	+52.21%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	149.61%	70.71%	+78.90%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	149.61%	70.71%	+78.90%

LCDL vs. BWET - Expense Ratio Comparison

LCDL has a 1.15% expense ratio, which is lower than BWET's 3.50% expense ratio.

Dividends

LCDL vs. BWET - Dividend Comparison

Neither LCDL nor BWET has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both LCDL and BWET in my portfolio?

LCDL and BWET have a correlation of -0.08, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, LCDL or BWET?

LCDL has higher volatility (41.04%) compared to BWET (25.84%). In terms of maximum drawdown, LCDL dropped -98.50% vs BWET's -56.90%.

Which ETF is better, LCDL or BWET?

On 1-year performance, BWET leads with 1888.50% vs -97.05% for LCDL. On fees, LCDL is cheaper at 1.15% per year. On volatility, BWET has been the lower-risk option at 25.84%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, LCDL or BWET?

Over the 1-year period, BWET has performed better with a 1888.50% return vs -97.05%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, LCDL or BWET?

LCDL is cheaper with a 1.15% expense ratio, compared with 3.50% for BWET.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, LCDL or BWET?

LCDL and BWET have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

What is the main difference between LCDL and BWET?

LCDL is categorized as Leveraged Equities, while BWET is Commodities. They also come from different issuers: GraniteShares and Amplify. Their fees differ too: 1.15% for LCDL and 3.50% for BWET.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

BWET currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (19.34 vs -0.64), 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.